Cargando…
Comparison of Clinical Examination and Various Imaging Modalities in the Diagnosis of Head and Neck Cancer
Introduction Squamous cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck (HNSCC) is the most common tumor entity of malignant processes in the head and neck area. Due to the metastasizing behavior of these tumors, the staging is indispensable for the treatment planning and requires imaging techniques, which are s...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
2021
|
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8096507/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33968217 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-3402435 |
_version_ | 1783688173923074048 |
---|---|
author | Schneider, Uwe Graß, Inse Laudien, Martin Quetz, Joachim Graefe, Hendrik Wollenberg, Barbara Meyer, Jens Eduard |
author_facet | Schneider, Uwe Graß, Inse Laudien, Martin Quetz, Joachim Graefe, Hendrik Wollenberg, Barbara Meyer, Jens Eduard |
author_sort | Schneider, Uwe |
collection | PubMed |
description | Introduction Squamous cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck (HNSCC) is the most common tumor entity of malignant processes in the head and neck area. Due to the metastasizing behavior of these tumors, the staging is indispensable for the treatment planning and requires imaging techniques, which are sensitive, specific, and as far as possible cost-effective, to benefit ultimately the patient and to ensure optimal care. Objectives The aim of the present study is to compare the clinical examination including palpation, ultrasound and computed tomography (CT)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the diagnosis of neck metastases to make the correct indication for a neck dissection. Methods Data from 286 patients with HNSCC were analyzed for neck metastases to determine which diagnostic tool is the best to answer the question if a neck dissection is necessary or not. Each study method was examined retrospectively by comparing sensitivity, specificity, the positive/negative predictive value, the positive likelihood ratio and the diagnostic accuracy. Results The ultrasound showed a sensitivity of 91.52%, a specificity of 61.67%, a positive/negative predictive value of 76.65%/84.09%, a positive likelihood ratio of 2.39 and a diagnostic accuracy of 78.95%. The clinical examination showed a sensitivity of 75.76%, a specificity of 66.12%, a positive/negative predictive value of 75.30%/66.67%, a positive likelihood ratio of 2.24 and a diagnostic accuracy of 71.68%. The CT/MRI showed a sensitivity of 78.66%, a specificity of 62.50%, a positive/negative predictive value of 74.14%/68.18%, a positive likelihood ratio of 2.10 and a diagnostic accuracy of 71.83%. Radiographically, ultrasound, as well as the clinical examination, could be judged to be free from radiation load and side effects from the contrast medium. The high dependence on the investigator when using ultrasound made reproducibility of the results difficult. Conclusions It could be shown that ultrasound was the diagnostic tool with the highest sensitivity, positive/negative predictive value, positive likelihood ratio and diagnostic accuracy by detecting and interpreting metastases in the head and neck region correctly. Whether a neck dissection should be performed depends to a large extent on the ultrasound findings. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8096507 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80965072021-05-06 Comparison of Clinical Examination and Various Imaging Modalities in the Diagnosis of Head and Neck Cancer Schneider, Uwe Graß, Inse Laudien, Martin Quetz, Joachim Graefe, Hendrik Wollenberg, Barbara Meyer, Jens Eduard Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol Introduction Squamous cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck (HNSCC) is the most common tumor entity of malignant processes in the head and neck area. Due to the metastasizing behavior of these tumors, the staging is indispensable for the treatment planning and requires imaging techniques, which are sensitive, specific, and as far as possible cost-effective, to benefit ultimately the patient and to ensure optimal care. Objectives The aim of the present study is to compare the clinical examination including palpation, ultrasound and computed tomography (CT)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the diagnosis of neck metastases to make the correct indication for a neck dissection. Methods Data from 286 patients with HNSCC were analyzed for neck metastases to determine which diagnostic tool is the best to answer the question if a neck dissection is necessary or not. Each study method was examined retrospectively by comparing sensitivity, specificity, the positive/negative predictive value, the positive likelihood ratio and the diagnostic accuracy. Results The ultrasound showed a sensitivity of 91.52%, a specificity of 61.67%, a positive/negative predictive value of 76.65%/84.09%, a positive likelihood ratio of 2.39 and a diagnostic accuracy of 78.95%. The clinical examination showed a sensitivity of 75.76%, a specificity of 66.12%, a positive/negative predictive value of 75.30%/66.67%, a positive likelihood ratio of 2.24 and a diagnostic accuracy of 71.68%. The CT/MRI showed a sensitivity of 78.66%, a specificity of 62.50%, a positive/negative predictive value of 74.14%/68.18%, a positive likelihood ratio of 2.10 and a diagnostic accuracy of 71.83%. Radiographically, ultrasound, as well as the clinical examination, could be judged to be free from radiation load and side effects from the contrast medium. The high dependence on the investigator when using ultrasound made reproducibility of the results difficult. Conclusions It could be shown that ultrasound was the diagnostic tool with the highest sensitivity, positive/negative predictive value, positive likelihood ratio and diagnostic accuracy by detecting and interpreting metastases in the head and neck region correctly. Whether a neck dissection should be performed depends to a large extent on the ultrasound findings. Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda. 2021-04 2020-05-13 /pmc/articles/PMC8096507/ /pubmed/33968217 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-3402435 Text en Fundação Otorrinolaringologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Schneider, Uwe Graß, Inse Laudien, Martin Quetz, Joachim Graefe, Hendrik Wollenberg, Barbara Meyer, Jens Eduard Comparison of Clinical Examination and Various Imaging Modalities in the Diagnosis of Head and Neck Cancer |
title | Comparison of Clinical Examination and Various Imaging Modalities in the Diagnosis of Head and Neck Cancer |
title_full | Comparison of Clinical Examination and Various Imaging Modalities in the Diagnosis of Head and Neck Cancer |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Clinical Examination and Various Imaging Modalities in the Diagnosis of Head and Neck Cancer |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Clinical Examination and Various Imaging Modalities in the Diagnosis of Head and Neck Cancer |
title_short | Comparison of Clinical Examination and Various Imaging Modalities in the Diagnosis of Head and Neck Cancer |
title_sort | comparison of clinical examination and various imaging modalities in the diagnosis of head and neck cancer |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8096507/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33968217 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-3402435 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT schneideruwe comparisonofclinicalexaminationandvariousimagingmodalitiesinthediagnosisofheadandneckcancer AT graßinse comparisonofclinicalexaminationandvariousimagingmodalitiesinthediagnosisofheadandneckcancer AT laudienmartin comparisonofclinicalexaminationandvariousimagingmodalitiesinthediagnosisofheadandneckcancer AT quetzjoachim comparisonofclinicalexaminationandvariousimagingmodalitiesinthediagnosisofheadandneckcancer AT graefehendrik comparisonofclinicalexaminationandvariousimagingmodalitiesinthediagnosisofheadandneckcancer AT wollenbergbarbara comparisonofclinicalexaminationandvariousimagingmodalitiesinthediagnosisofheadandneckcancer AT meyerjenseduard comparisonofclinicalexaminationandvariousimagingmodalitiesinthediagnosisofheadandneckcancer |