Which is Important in the Evaluation of Metastatic Lymph Nodes in Head and Neck Cancer: Palpation,Ultrasonography,or Computed Tomography?

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate palpation, ultrasonography (USG), and computed tomography (CT) with respect to their value for comparative determination of metastatic lymph nodes in head and neck cancer.

STUDY DESIGN: A prospective study was conducted in a tertiary referral hospital. During September 1996 and April 1999, clinical investigation, USG, and CT were performed preoperatively on 48 patients who would undergo neck dissection for primary head and neck malignancy. The presence of metastatic lymph nodes in pathologic specimens were compared with the findings of palpation, CT, and USG.

RESULTS: Twenty-two of the patients had positive lymph nodes on pathologic investigation. The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value, and accuracy for palpation are 64%, 85%, 74%, 78%, and 75% respectively. Respective values for USG and CT for sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value, and accuracy are 72%, 96%, 80%, 94%, and 85% and 81%, 96%, 85%, 90%, and 87%.

CONCLUSION: All of the pretreatment evaluation methods, palpation, CT, and USG yield results that are significantly different from the histopathologic results, suggesting that no pretreatment study can accurately assess the requirement to histopathologically stage the neck. USG findings are more correlated with the pathologic findings than palpation, but CT gives the most effective and reliable results when it is combined with USG in neck staging. Preoperative USG and CT scanning of the neck by an experienced radiologist is essential and useful for diagnosis, staging, and therapy choices.

SIGNIFICANCE: Statistical analysis was done with χ² test. The difference between histologic findings and palpation is significant (P = 0.0005). The difference between histologic findings and USG and CT is significant (P = 0.0001 and P = 0.0001).

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Myers

Fagan

Treatment of the N+ neck in squamous cell carcinoma of the upper aerodigestive tract. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1998;31:671–86.

Stevens

Harnsberger

Mancuso

Computed tomography of cervical lymph nodes: staging and management of head and neck cancer. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1985;111:735–9.

Breau

Suen

Management of the N0 neck. Otolaryngol Clin North Am 1998;31:657–69.

Curtin

Ishwaran

Mancuso

Comparison of CT and MR imaging in staging of neck metastases. Radiology 1998;207:123–30.

Baatenburg de

Jong RJ

Rongen

Lamëris

Metastatic neck disease. Palpation vs ultrasound examination. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1989; 115: 689–90.

Bruneton

Roux

Caramella

Ear, nose and throat cancer: ultrasound diagnosis of metastasis to cervical lymph nodes. Radiology 1984;152:771–3.

Friedman

Shelton

Mafee

Metastatic neck disease: evaluation by CT. Arch Otolaryngol 1984;110:443–7.

Som

Curtin

Mancuso

An imaging based classification for the cervical nodes designed as an adjunct to recent clinically based nodal classifications. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1999;125:388–96.

Robbins

Integrating radiological criteria into the classification of cervical lymph node disease. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1999;125:385–7.

10.

Mancuso

Hamsberger

Muraki

Computed tomography of cervical and retropharyngeal lymph nodes: normal anatomy, variants of normal and applications in staging head and neck cancer. Radiology 1983;148:715–23.

11.

Som

Lymph nodes of the neck. Radiology 1987;165:593–600.

12.

Mancuso

Maceri

Rice

CT of cervical lymph node cancer. Am J Radiol 1981;136:381–5.

13.

Van del Brekel

MWM

Castelijns

Snow

Detection of lymph node metastases in the neck: radiologic criteria. Radiology 1994;192:617–8.

14.

Steinkamp

Mathe

Treisch

Histologically controlled study of the value of US and palpation for the detection and exclusion of neck lymph node enlargements and metastasis. Radiology 1991;1:312–8.