4.6 Article

Abnormal cervical lymph nodes in multiple sclerosis: a preliminary ultrasound study

Journal

RADIOLOGIA MEDICA
Volume 123, Issue 3, Pages 202-208

Publisher

SPRINGER-VERLAG ITALIA SRL
DOI: 10.1007/s11547-017-0829-4

Keywords

Cervical lymph nodes; Multiple sclerosis; Ultrasound

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Cervical lymph nodes are the first drainage stations of the brain and therefore play a key role in neuroinflammatory disorders such as multiple sclerosis. Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate, by using ultrasound imaging, cervical lymph nodes in patients with multiple sclerosis and to ascertain if such patients have any clinical features to attest their role. Methods We enrolled 43 patients affected by relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (22 drug free and 21 under treatment with natalizumab or fingolimod), who underwent ultrasound examination. The morphology, diameters and volume of cervical lymph nodes were measured. We evaluated also a control group of 20 healthy volunteers. Results Between-group comparisons showed that the mean anteroposterior diameters in the cervical lymph nodes on both sides of the neck were significantly different (chi(2) = 19.5, p < 0.001 for right; chi(2) = 20.0, p < 0.001 for left). Post hoc contrasts showed that the mean anteroposterior diameters were greater both in drug-naive (mean +/- SD 0.66 +/- 0.20 cm; p < 0.001) and treated patients (0.55 +/- 0.24 cm; p < 0.001) compared to healthy individuals (0.36 +/- 0.19 cm). Moreover, significant difference (p < 0.001) was shown on comparing the mean volume of the cervical lymph nodes on both sides of the neck in the studied groups. No significant differences emerged between the drug-free and treated patients. Conclusion The abnormalities shown by ultrasound in cervical lymph nodes are related to deep ones and independent of the ongoing treatment, suggesting a relationship between lymphatic drainage and disease pathology.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available