BACKGROUND: It is believed that the stiffness or hardness of a lymph node containing a metastasis differs from that of lymph node without a metastasis because of the difference in tissue density, which is derived from the lymph node's histopathologic features. Prior to this study, however, there had been no attempts to quantify the hardness or stiffness of lymph nodes. The authors developed a new tactile sensor and system for measuring the stiffness (g/cm) of lymph nodes accurately, and they studied its utility as a tool for diagnosing lymph node metastases. METHODS: Clinical specimens were obtained from 14 patients who underwent lobectomy or pneumonectomy with hilar and mediastinal lymph node dissection for nonsmall cell lung carcinoma at the University of Tokyo between January and July 1996. With the tactile sensor developed by the authors, 212 resected lymph nodes were measured for their stiffness. RESULTS: Among these 212 resected lymph nodes, 57 were diagnosed as containing metastases (38 from adenocarcinomas and 19 from squamous cell carcinomas). The mean stiffness of the lymph nodes that contained metastases was 3.35 +/- 1.57 g/cm, and that of lymph nodes without metastases was 1.23 +/- 0.50 g/cm (P < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed that the area under the curve was 0.93, indicating excellent accuracy of the method. When the cutoff was 1.5 g/cm, the sensitivity was 91.2% and the specificity was 78.1% for detection of lymph node metastases. CONCLUSIONS: Measurement of the stiffness of resected lymph nodes was confirmed as an accurate approach to diagnosing lymph node metastases without knowledge of other factors, such as lymph node size or color.
BACKGROUND: It is believed that the stiffness or hardness of a lymph node containing a metastasis differs from that of lymph node without a metastasis because of the difference in tissue density, which is derived from the lymph node's histopathologic features. Prior to this study, however, there had been no attempts to quantify the hardness or stiffness of lymph nodes. The authors developed a new tactile sensor and system for measuring the stiffness (g/cm) of lymph nodes accurately, and they studied its utility as a tool for diagnosing lymph node metastases. METHODS: Clinical specimens were obtained from 14 patients who underwent lobectomy or pneumonectomy with hilar and mediastinal lymph node dissection for nonsmall cell lung carcinoma at the University of Tokyo between January and July 1996. With the tactile sensor developed by the authors, 212 resected lymph nodes were measured for their stiffness. RESULTS: Among these 212 resected lymph nodes, 57 were diagnosed as containing metastases (38 from adenocarcinomas and 19 from squamous cell carcinomas). The mean stiffness of the lymph nodes that contained metastases was 3.35 +/- 1.57 g/cm, and that of lymph nodes without metastases was 1.23 +/- 0.50 g/cm (P < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed that the area under the curve was 0.93, indicating excellent accuracy of the method. When the cutoff was 1.5 g/cm, the sensitivity was 91.2% and the specificity was 78.1% for detection of lymph node metastases. CONCLUSIONS: Measurement of the stiffness of resected lymph nodes was confirmed as an accurate approach to diagnosing lymph node metastases without knowledge of other factors, such as lymph node size or color.
Authors: Nathan Andrew Rohner; Jacob McClain; Sara Lydia Tuell; Alex Warner; Blair Smith; Youngho Yun; Abhinav Mohan; Manuela Sushnitha; Susan Napier Thomas Journal: FASEB J Date: 2015-07-15 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Christopher Walter; Lindsey Crawford; Melinda Lai; Joseph A Toonen; Yuan Pan; Shelly Sakiyama-Elbert; David H Gutmann; Amit Pathak Journal: Biophys J Date: 2017-04-25 Impact factor: 4.033
Authors: Lester H Lambert; Geraldine K E Goebrecht; Sarah E De Leo; Roddy S O'Connor; Selene Nunez-Cruz; Tai-De Li; Jinglun Yuan; Michael C Milone; Lance C Kam Journal: Nano Lett Date: 2017-01-30 Impact factor: 11.189
Authors: Xin Tang; Theresa B Kuhlenschmidt; Jiaxi Zhou; Philip Bell; Fei Wang; Mark S Kuhlenschmidt; Taher A Saif Journal: Biophys J Date: 2010-10-20 Impact factor: 4.033
Authors: Jennifer H Hammel; Jonathan M Zatorski; Sophie R Cook; Rebecca R Pompano; Jennifer M Munson Journal: Adv Drug Deliv Rev Date: 2022-01-11 Impact factor: 15.470
Authors: John W Hickey; Yi Dong; Jae Wook Chung; Sebastian F Salathe; Hawley C Pruitt; Xiaowei Li; Calvin Chang; Andrew K Fraser; Catherine A Bessell; Andrew J Ewald; Sharon Gerecht; Hai-Quan Mao; Jonathan P Schneck Journal: Adv Mater Date: 2019-04-10 Impact factor: 30.849