Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 117825

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : April | Volume : 16 | Issue : 4 | Page : TC01 - TC05 Full Version

Role of Sonography and Sonoelastography in Characterisation of Cervical Lymphadenopathy with Pathological Association: A Cohort Study


Published: April 1, 2022 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2022/50832.16195
Sumit Kaushik, Madhu Sharma, Lal Bahadur Sharma, Ankur Malhotra, Deepti Arora, Anshul Jain

1. Junior Resident, Department of Radiodiagnosis, Teerthanker Mahaveer Medical College and Research Centre, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India. 2. Professor, Department of Radiodiagnosis, Teerthanker Mahaveer Medical College and Research Centre, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India. 3. Consultant, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India. 4. Professor, Department of Radiodiagnosis, Teerthanker Mahaveer Medical College and Research Centre, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India. 5. Associate Professor, Department of Pathology, Teerthanker Mahaveer Medical College and Research Centre, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India. 6. Junior Resident, Department of Radiodiagnosis, Teerthanker Mahaveer Medical College and Research Centre, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Sumit Kaushik,
69, Type II, AIIMS Campus, Masjid Moth, New Delhi, India.
E-mail: sk7sk7777@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Identification of the nature of lymph nodes is one of the most important parameters for diagnosis in any oncological setting. The lymph nodes help in staging and this directly affects the prognostic outcome and treatment decision. Ultrasound is the preferred imaging method for distinguishing between benign and malignant superficial lymph nodes given ease of availability and its low cost. However, there is no reliable and definitive sonographic criterion in ultrasound to categorise lymph nodes as benign or malignant.

Aim: To evaluate the role of sonography and sonoelastography in characterisation of cervical lymphadenopathy and to associate the imaging findings with cytopathology.

Materials and Methods: This was a prospective cohort study, conducted over a period of one year in Teerthanker Mahaveer Medical College and Research Centre, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India, constituting a total of 60 patients with enlarged cervical lymph nodes and evaluated on B-mode ultrasound and elastography in the present study. The ultrasonography was performed using either Acuson S3000 ultrasound system (Siemens Medical Solutions, Mountain View, CA) with a 4 to 9 MHz linear transducer for conventional sonography and Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse (ARFI) imaging. Results of radiological findings were tabulated, evaluated and collated with pathological findings.

Results: ARFI imaging displayed a sensitivity and specificity of 80% and 97.5% respectively with a Positive Predictive Value (PPV) and Negative Predictive Value (NPV) of 94.1% and 90.7% respectively in distinguishing malignant from benign cervical lymphadenopathy with the diagnostic accuracy being 91.67%. Using Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curve (AUC) of 0.925, a cut-off value for shear wave velocity of 2.98 m/s was obtained.

Conclusion: ARFI is a novel technique which can be used to characterise the nature of cervical lymph nodes. Present study demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy (91.67%) in comparison with histopathological findings, ARFI elastography may help in distinction of benign from malignant nodes in adjunct to the gray scale.

Keywords

Lymph nodes, Lymphoma, Metastases, Tuberculous nodes, Ultrasound

Enlarged cervical lymph nodes is a common finding in routine clinical examination, especially head and neck diseases, many-a-times it is the only manifestation. There are numerous causes of cervical lymphadenopathy such as infective (bacterial, viral, protozoal), autoimmune or malignant to list a few. Therefore, identification of nature of lymph nodes is fundamental for diagnosis, especially in any oncological setting as this shall have bearing on the staging and hence, affects the prognostic outcome and treatment decision directly. Currently, the cytology and histopathological assessment is considered to be the standard for differentiation for enlarged cervical lymph nodes into benign and malignant. However, because of invasiveness of the procedure and to minimise patient apprehension, there is need for a non invasive method which could help in reduction of number of avoidable Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology (FNAC) sampling or biopsies (1),(2).

Gray scale ultrasound is emerging as the preferred imaging method for distinction between benign and malignant superficial lymph nodes. However, overlapping of features exist and still there is no single definitive criterion to characterise lymph nodes as malignant or benign reliably. Sonoelastography is a novel technique that works on the principle that different kinds of biological tissues have different stiffness and can be measured through it. Strain and shear wave are two varieties of ultrasound elastography (3),(4),(5).

In strain elastography mode of compression is operator dependent. Shear wave elasticity, on the other hand, utilises ARFI which instead of applying manual compression, uses transducer induced “pushing pulse” to apply external compression on tissues in the Region Of Interest (ROI) and subsequent serial diagnostic intensity pulses to track tissue micro-displacements. Therefore, it reduces operator dependency and improves reproducibility (6).

Various studies by different authors have been carried out in this regard. For instance, in a study by Rubaltelli L et al., they found that sonoelastography demonstrated a diagnostic accuracy of 77% on comparison with the results of pathological examination (7). Even still, this is an upcoming diagnostic technique on which several studies are being done. However, more research is imperative. Hence, present study was conducted to assess the role of sonoelastography in characterisation of enlarged cervical lymph nodes with histopathological association.

Material and Methods

This study was a prospective cohort study, was conducted over a period of one year (December 2018-December 2019) after obtaining Institutional Ethical Committee (IEC) (Ethical Certificate Ref. TMMC&RC/IEC/18-19/075) Teerthanker Mahaveer Medical College and Research Centre, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh, India. A total of 60 patients with enlarged cervical lymph nodes who reported during the study duration and fulfilled the eligibility criteria were included.

Inclusion criteria: Patients with enlarged cervical lymph nodes of all age groups were included.

Exclusion criteria: Pathologically proven cases, lymph nodes of <10 mm in diameter, patient on active treatment, post-chemotherapy or post-radiotherapy lymph nodes were excluded.

Methodology

Each patient was evaluated by gray scale or B-mode sonography and later elastographic (ARFI) assessment was done with the help of Siemens Acuson S2000 ultrasound machine using linear 9L4 transducer. Later, final diagnosis correlation was done by histopathology (FNAC) for every lesion.

B-mode US: All the lymph nodes were be evaluated and recorded for the following B-mode characteristics: -

1. Size
2. Side and Level in the neck
3. Short axis and long axis diameter ratio
4. Margins: Well defined or ill defined
5. Echo pattern: Homogeneous or Heterogeneous; Echogenicity- hypo/iso-hyperechoic
6. Presence or absence of calcification
7. Vascular pattern: Mixed (Both central and peripheral) or central or peripheral
8. Presence or absence of fatty hilum.

Sonoelastography: Ultrasound probe was applied vertically to the skin with adequate coupling gel such that a minimal pressure was imparted making a complete contact with the skin over suspected lesion. The patient was then asked to hold the breath so as to minimise any kind of movement. Then, Virtual Touch Tissue Quantification (VTQ) was turned on which showed a box of 0.5×0.6 cm on the screen which was the ROI. The ROI was placed completely within the lymph node. Shear Wave Velocity (SWV) within the ROI was measured which was expressed in metres/second (m/s). There were a few instances where the machine could not display SWV in numericals but rather as “X.XX m/s” as the range provided by the manufacturer is between 0.5 m/s and 8.4 m/s. For these lesions, values of 8.4 m/s were recorded if Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging (VTI) images appeared dark, 0 m/s if the lesion appeared bright. A total of five values for each lesion were taken. The findings of B-mode sonography and elastography were collated with histopathological diagnosis.

Statistical Analysis

Categorical variables were presented in the form of number and percentages while continuous variables were presented as mean±Standard Deviation (SD) and median values. The authors applied following statistical tests for results:

1. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV was assessed of ultrasound and doppler characteristics and Mean Shear Wave Velocity (MSV) values (in m/s) for predicting malignancy.
2. The association of qualitative variables was analysed using Fisher’s-Exact test.

ROC curve was used to find out cut-off point of MSV values (in m/s)for predicting malignancy. Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software ver. 21.0 was utilised for the final analysis and p<0.05 was considered as significant.

Results

In the present study, out of the 60 lymph nodes that were studied 40 (66.7%) were benign while 20 (33.3%) were classified as malignant on histopathology. The most common aetiology among the malignant lymph nodes was metastatic squamous cell carcinoma (55%) followed by Hodgkin’s lymphoma (15%). Amongst benign aetiology, Tubercular Lymphadenitis were reported to be the most common (47.50%) followed by reactive lymphadenopathy (32.50%).

All the patients diagnosed with granulomatous lymphadenitis showed a MSV value <3, 92.31% for reactive lymphadenitis and 100% for tubercular lymphadenitis (Table/Fig 1),(Table/Fig 2). The MSV in 2adenocarcinoma (Table/Fig 3), poorly differentiated metastatic carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma showed higher MSV values (>6 m/s) (Table/Fig 4). However, Hodgkin’s lymphoma
(Table/Fig 5) and non Hodgkin’s lymphoma showed lower MSV values (<3 m/s) (Table/Fig 6).

Majority of the patients with malignant aetiology displayed higher MSV values (in m/s) >2.98 as compared to those with benign aetiology ≤2.98 (Table/Fig 7). Interpretation of the area under the ROC curve showed that the performance of MSV values (in m/s) (AUC 0.925; 95% CI: 0.827 to 0.977) was outstanding. It was observed that among patients who had final diagnosis of benign, 97.50% of patients had MSV (in m/s) ≤2.98 (Table/Fig 8).

Discriminatory power of MSV values (in m/s) (AUC 0.925; 95% CI: 0.827 to 0.977) was outstanding. Discriminatory power of sonographic criteria such heterogenous, absent hilum, peripheral and mixed vascular pattern and MSV (in m/s) (AUC 0.89; 95% CI: 0.78 to 0.95) was excellent and discriminatory power of short-axis to long-axis ratio (>0.5) (AUC 0.76; 95% CI: 0.64 to 0.86) and ill-defined margins (AUC 0.61; 95% CI: 0.48 to 0.74) was acceptable. (Table/Fig 9). Among all the parameters, MSV (in m/s) was the best predictor of malignancy at cut off point of >2.98 with 92.5% chances of correctly predicting malignancy.

Discussion

Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse (ARFI) elastography is a relatively newer technique that provides a quantitative value (in m/s) to measure the hardness of a tissue which in turn helps us to assess the tissue hardness. Therefore, this allows us and helps in distinction between benign and malignant tissues (6). In present study, gray scale features predicting malignancy were heterogenicity, short to long axis diameter ratio of >0.5, peripheral or mixed vascularity pattern, ill-defined margins and absence of fatty hilum. These were in accordance in with the study conducted by Fang WT et al., who showed a sensitivity of 95% with p-value 0.043 in malignant nodes for short to long axis diameter ratio of >0.5 (8). Similar statistically significant results were also displayed in the studies by Ariji Y et al., (66% sensitivity, specificity 95%) (9) and Ahuja AT et al., who emphasised that S/L ratio >0.5 was indicative of malignancy (10). Majority of the malignant nodes showed S/L ratio >0.5 with a high sensitivity (85%) which was similar to as demonstrated by Yadav R et al., (81%). They also exhibited that peripheral vascularity favours malignancy and Colour Doppler Ultrasound (CDUS) had high sensitivity (81-96.3%) and specificity (50-96.3%) which were in agreement with current study (11).

Heterogeneous Echo pattern was the most frequent (positivity rate of 83-88%). In metastatic/malignant lymph nodes in the study conducted by Dayanand Saraswathi M et al., which was in agreement with present study as 100% in malignant nodes. Also, 97.5% benign nodes demonstrated well defined margins. This was in consensus with the findings by Dayanand Saraswathi M et al., who showed a high PPV (93%) for well-defined nodal margins for benign nodes (12). It was observed in the study that malignant lymph nodes showed higher shear wave velocities and were higher in contrast to benign which were statistically significant. About 80% of patients had MSV/median shear wave velocity values (in metres/seconds) >2.98. Present study found that if MSV values (in m/s) >2.98, then there was 94.10% probability of malignancy and if MSV values (in m/s) ≤2.98, then 90.70% chances of benign. Among benign nodes, 97.50% of patients had MSV values ≤2.98 m/s (Table/Fig 1) and (Table/Fig 6).

In present study, AUC showed that the MSV values was the significant predictor of malignancy at cut-off point of >2.98 with a specificity of 97.5%, sensitivity of 80% and PPV, NPV and diagnostic accuracy were 94.1%, 90.7%, 91.67% respectively (Table/Fig 7). Findings of contemporary study are in harmony with those published by Vinayagamani S et al., who also reported MSV values to be higher in patients with malignant aetiology as compared to those with benign. They showed that the distinction among non malignant and malignant lymph nodes had a PPV and NPV of 100 and 83.9 respectively with an accuracy of 89.9%; sensitivity and specificity being 79.17 and 100 respectively. Using ROC curve analysis, they derived a cut-off SWV value of 2.8 m/s with value of area under the curve as 0.892 which was statistically significant (13).

Fujiwara T et al., also proved that metastatic/malignant lymph nodes had higher SWV than benign/reactive lymph nodes (2.46±0.75 m/s in comparison to 1.52±0.48 m/s). They derived a SWV cut-off value of more than 1.9 m/s with the AUC of 0.923 (95% CI, 0.842-1.000). This showed a 95.00% specificity, 81.80% sensitivity and 88.00% accuracy (14). Similarly, Chanda R et al., demonstrated that the mean SWV was higher in malignant nodes (3.7±2.27 m/s) in contrast to benign nodes (2.02±0.94 m/s) and concluded that ARFI exhibited a higher diagnostic performance over gray-scale sonography and CDUS in identification of nature of lymph nodes (15). It was also observed that mean SWV values for lymph nodes with Hodgkin’s (2.8 m/s) and Non Hodgkin’s lymphoma (2.64 m/s) were lower from the cut-off value, even though they demonstrated gray scale features of malignant lymph nodes. Therefore, a total of five lymphomatous lymph nodes (Table/Fig 8) showed false negative results which was attributable to the consistency of lymphomatous nodes that are relatively firm in consistency and softer as compared to malignant nodes. These were in accordance to studies by Vinayagamani S et al., and Ahuja AT et al., who also reported that lymphomatous lymph nodes showed lower SWV as compared to malignant lymph nodes in their respective studies (13),(16).

Rubaltelli L et al., compared sonoelastography with cytological and/or histological diagnosis, however, demonstrated a sensitivity of 75%, specificity of 80%, and accuracy of 77% which was lower than the current study. The dissimilarity in results could be attributed to the fact that the elastographic study of lymph nodes is affected by the position of the node (superficial or deep) and its relation to nearby structures such as muscles, superficial bones, or large blood vessels. Also, lymph nodes situated at a location below any lump or curved surface, may impart incorect ARFI readings as the impulse becomes non linear and non uniform in such cases (7).

Limitation(s)

There was a scarcity of number and wider variety of cases having malignant lymph nodes in the present study. Present study included only a total of 20 malignant lymph nodes. It is evident that supplementary studies with more number and wider variety of cases (of both benign and malignant aetiology) are essential to substantiate the value of ARFI elastography technique to distinguish benign from malignant lymph nodes.

Conclusion

The B-mode ultrasound features that help in prediction of malignancy are short to long axis diameter ratio of >0.5, absence of fatty hilum, heterogeneous echotexture, peripheral and mixed (central as well as peripheral) vascularity. ARFI imaging showed that SWV values were higher for malignant nodes in comparison to benign nodes significantly. The present study also illustrated a high diagnostic accuracy (91.67%) of ARFI imaging in comparison to histopathology. Thus, ARFI can be used in practice to aid in the characterisation of nature of lymph nodes along with gray scale sonography.

References

1.
Kerr DA, Ash MM, Millard HD. Oral Diagnosis. 6th ed. USA: CV Mosby; 1983. p. 67.
2.
Kataria P, Sachdeva M, Singh NK. FNAC as a diagnostic tool for the diagnosis of cervical lymphadenopathy. Bull Environ Pharmacol Life Sci. 2012;1:72.77.
3.
Jayaraman V, Austin RD, Ramasamy R. The efficacy of colour doppler ultrasound in differentiating malignant and nonmalignant head and neck lymph node enlargement. Int J Dental Sci Res. 2013;1(1):08-15.
4.
Zhang F, Zhao X, Ji X, Han R, Li P, Du M. Diagnostic value of acoustic radiation force impulse imaging for assessing superficial lymph nodes: A diagnostic accuracy study. Med. 2017;96(43):e8125. [crossref] [PubMed]
5.
Asha V, Upadhyay K. Ultrasound Elastography. implications in the head and neck region. IJSS Case Reports & Reviews 2014;1(3):38-41.
6.
Itoh A, Ueno E, Tohno E, Kamma H, Takahashi H, Shiina T, et al. Breast disease: Clinical application of US elastography for diagnosis. Radiol. 2006;239(2):341-50. [crossref] [PubMed]
7.
Rubaltelli L, Stramare R, Tregnaghi A, Scagliori E, Cecchelero E, Mannucci M. The role of sonoelastography in the differential diagnosis of neck nodules. J Ultrasound. 2009;12(3):93-100. [crossref] [PubMed]
8.
Fang WT, Zhang ZH, Chen WH, Jiang Y, Tao JW, Zhou YZ. Ultrasound surveillance of cervical lymph node metastasis in thoracic esophageal carcinoma. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi [Chinese Journal of Surgery]. 2003;41(7):523-25.
9.
Ariji Y, Kimura Y, Hayashi N, Onitsuka T, Yonetsu K, Hayashi K, et al. Power doppler sonography of cervical lymph nodes in patients with head and neck cancer. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1998;19(2):303-07.
10.
Ahuja AT, Ying M, Ho SY, Antonio G, Lee YP, King AD, et al. Ultrasound of malignant cervical lymph nodes. Cancer Imaging. 2008;8(1):48-56. [crossref] [PubMed]
11.
Yadav R, Malik A, Prasad R. Role of sonoelastography beyond sonography for differentiation between reactive and metastatic lymphadenopathy. J Head Neck Physicians Surg. 2020;8:109-13.
12.
Dayanand Saraswathi M, Desai R, Reddy P. Efficiency of ultrasonography in assessing cervical lymph node metastasis in oral carcinoma. Natl J Maxillofac Surg. 2010;1(2):117-22. [crossref] [PubMed]
13.
Vinayagamani S, Prakash A, Chowdhury V, Jain SL, Gulati A, Garg A. Is Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse (ARFI) ultrasound elastography valuable in the assessment of cervical lymphadenopathy? Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2018;70(4):597-603. [crossref] [PubMed]
14.
Fujiwara T, Tomokuni J, Iwanaga K, Ooba S, Haji T. Acoustic radiation force impulse imaging for reactive and malignant/metastatic cervical lymph nodes. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2013;39(7):1178-83. [crossref] [PubMed]
15.
Chanda R, Kandagaddala M, Moses V, Sigamani E, Keshava SN, Janakiraman R. Role of ultrasound acoustic radiation force impulse in differentiating benign from malignant superficial lymph nodes. J Clin Imaging Sci. 2020;10:18. [crossref] [PubMed]
16.
Ahuja AT, Ying M, Yuen HY, Metreweli C. ‘Pseudocystic’ appearance of non-Hodgkin’s lymphomatous nodes: an infrequent finding with high-resolution transducers. Clin Radiol. 2001;56(2):111-15. [crossref] [PubMed]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/50832.16195

Date of Submission: Jun 16, 2021
Date of Peer Review: Aug 05, 2021
Date of Acceptance: Feb 10, 2022
Date of Publishing: Apr 01, 2022

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. Yes

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Jun 17, 2021
• Manual Googling: Nov 08, 2021
• iThenticate Software: Feb 08, 2022 (6%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com