Loading…

Benign regional lymph nodes in gastric cancer on multidetector row CT

Background Benign regional lymph nodes (LNs) are sometimes enlarged in gastric cancer patients due to reactive or inflammatory changes. Frequently these enlarged LNs can mimic LN metastasis and lead to overstaging. Purpose To assess frequency of benign regional LNs in gastric cancer patients compare...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Acta radiologica (1987) 2012-06, Vol.53 (5), p.501-507
Main Authors: Park, Hee Sun, Kim, Young Jun, Ko, Su Yeon, Yoo, Moon-Won, Lee, Kyung Yung, Jung, Sung-Il, Jeon, Hae Jeong
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background Benign regional lymph nodes (LNs) are sometimes enlarged in gastric cancer patients due to reactive or inflammatory changes. Frequently these enlarged LNs can mimic LN metastasis and lead to overstaging. Purpose To assess frequency of benign regional LNs in gastric cancer patients compared with that in a healthy population and to assess the frequency of benign regional LNs in gastric cancer according to T-staging. Material and Methods Between August 2005 and June 2009, 177 patients with surgically proven gastric cancer without LN metastasis (TanyN0M0) who had previously undergone preoperative multidetector row CT (MDCT) and 168 healthy patients who visited the healthcare center and underwent an abdominal MDCT were included in this retrospective study. An abdominal radiologist evaluated the distribution of regional LNs and measured the short diameter of LNs ≥6 mm, ≥8 mm, and ≥10 mm. The number of enlarged benign LNs was compared between the two groups, and the distribution of LN with regard to T-stage of gastric cancer was also evaluated. Results At least one LN ≥6 mm, ≥8 mm, and ≥10 mm was detected in 64.4% (114/177), 22.0% (39/177), and 4.0% (7/177) of patients in the gastric cancer group, respectively, compared to 29.8% (50/168), 4.2% (7/168), and 0% of patients in the healthy group, respectively. The difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P
ISSN:0284-1851
1600-0455
DOI:10.1258/ar.2012.120054