4.2 Article

Homogeneity Parameter in Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Imaging Improves the Classification of Abnormal Cervical Lymph Node after Thyroidectomy in Patients with Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma

期刊

BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL
卷 2019, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2019/9296010

关键词

-

资金

  1. Medical Guide Project of the Shanghai Science and Technology Commission [14411970400]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective. To explore the conventional and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) features of cervical lymph node metastasis (CLNM) in papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) patients postoperatively and analyze its pathological basis. Materials and Methods. Conventional and CEUS were performed in 86 abnormal cervical lymph nodes (ACLNs) from 56 PTC patients who had received thyroidectomy. Then, fine-needle aspiration (FNA) was taken to confirm pathological results, a multivariate analysis was performed to correlate the sonographic features of the CLNM, and then an equation for CLNM was established. Results. Fifty-four lymph nodes were confirmed to be metastasis of PTC by FNA. Intensity at peak time, homogeneity, and color flow patterns, cystic change, or microcalcification and echogenicity were significantly associated with CLNM. Multivariate analysis showed three strongest features (homogeneity, intensity of peak, and cystic change or calcification) to be significantly associated with the evidence of CLNM. Then, the equation was established with the following significant predictive factors: P = 1/1 + exp n-ary sumation [-3.213 + 2.77 * cystic or calcification + 0.13 * CDFI patterns + 3.65 * homogeneity + 2.43 * intensity at peak time]. Conclusion. Depiction of a heterogeneous hyperenhancement of cervical lymph nodes within CEUS studies and cystic change or microcalcification in conventional ultrasound were identified as predictive for metastatic lymph node invasion, and the equation was more accurate for predicting CLNM compared to single B-mode ultrasound and CEUS feature.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据