Literature DB >> 8915748

Radiologic assessment of intranodal vascularity in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Correlation with histologic vascular density.

S Lamer1, R Sigal, N Lassau, J Bosq, F Frouin, M Di Paola, G Mamelle, J Leclère, J Bittoun, R Di Paola.   

Abstract

RATIONALE AND
OBJECTIVES: Nodal response to chemotherapy in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma depends on the vascularization. The authors assessed different techniques in detecting nodal vascularization.
METHODS: Fourteen patients with head and neck tumor were included before surgical treatment. The largest metastatic lymph node (mean axial scanographic diameters 30 x 20 mm) was studied by color and pulsed Doppler, and dynamic magnetic resonance images, processed by factor analysis of medical image sequences (FAMIS), which estimates physiologic contrast enhancement kinetics (factors) and their spatial distributions (factor images). Results were compared with the histologic microvessel density (MVD). Using light microscopy, MVD was estimated by the vascular surface (by staining endothelial cells) to the stroma surface ratio x 100.
RESULTS: Three factors were identified by FAMIS: a constant factor in necrosis, an earlier F1 factor and a later F2 factor in normal lymphoid areas and neoplastic stroma. Color flow signal was detected when the MVD was greater than 6.36.
CONCLUSIONS: Only one model of vascularization was extracted by FAMIS, with no difference between neoplastic and spared lymphoid areas. The presence of color-flow signals could help predict the response of metastatic lymph nodes to chemotherapy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8915748     DOI: 10.1097/00004424-199611000-00001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Invest Radiol        ISSN: 0020-9996            Impact factor:   6.016


  6 in total

1.  A mathematical model for comparison of bolus injection, continuous infusion, and liposomal delivery of doxorubicin to tumor cells.

Authors:  A W El-Kareh; T W Secomb
Journal:  Neoplasia       Date:  2000 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.715

2.  [Dynamic magnetic resonance tomography (dMRT). It's value in advanced head-neck tumors treated with radiochemotherapy].

Authors:  M Helbig; H-P Schlemmer; M Lumer; M V Knopp; A Dietz
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2003-04-09       Impact factor: 1.284

3.  Discrimination of metastatic from non-metastatic mesorectal lymph nodes in rectal cancer using quantitative dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Xiao-Ping Yu; Lu Wen; Jing Hou; Hui Wang; Qiang Lu
Journal:  J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci       Date:  2016-07-28

4.  Diagnostic evaluation of magnetic resonance imaging with turbo inversion recovery sequence in head and neck tumors.

Authors:  Maliha Sadick; Haneen Sadick; Karl Hörmann; C Düber; Steffen J Diehl
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2005-01-25       Impact factor: 2.503

Review 5.  Evolutionary dynamics of carcinogenesis and why targeted therapy does not work.

Authors:  Robert J Gillies; Daniel Verduzco; Robert A Gatenby
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2012-06-14       Impact factor: 60.716

6.  Assessment of metastatic cervical adenopathy using dynamic contrast-enhanced MR imaging.

Authors:  Nancy J Fischbein; Susan M Noworolski; Roland G Henry; Michael J Kaplan; William P Dillon; Sarah J Nelson
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 3.825

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.