Comparative imaging study of mediastinal lymph node from pre-surgery dual energy CT versus post-surgeron verifications in non-small cell lung cancer patients.
- Author:
Qiao ZHU
;
Cui REN
;
Yan ZHANG
;
Mei Jiao LI
;
Xiao Hua WANG
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Lymph node metastasis;
Non-small cell lung cancer;
Tomography;
X-ray computed
- MeSH:
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung/diagnostic imaging*;
Humans;
Lung Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging*;
Lymph Nodes;
Lymphatic Metastasis;
Mediastinum;
Tomography, X-Ray Computed
- From:
Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences)
2020;52(4):730-737
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE:To validate the value of dual energy CT (DECT) in the differentiation of mediastinal metastatic lymph nodes from non-metastatic lymph nodes in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
METHODS:In the study, 57 surgically confirmed NSCLC patients who underwent enhanced DECT scan within 2 weeks before operation were enrolled. Two radiologists analyzed the CT images before operation. All mediastinal lymph nodes with short diameter≥5 mm on axial images were included in this study. The morphological parameters [long-axis diameter (L), short-axis diameter (S) and S/L of lymph nodes] and the DECT parameters [iodine concentration (IC), normalized iodine concentration (NIC), slope of spectral hounsfield unit curve (λHU) and effective atomic number (Zeff) in arterial and venous phase] were measured. The differences of morphological parameters and DECT parameters between metastatic and non-metastatic lymph nodes were compared. The parameters with significant difference were analyzed by the Logistic regression model, then a new predictive variable was established. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analyses were performed for S, NIC in venous phase and the new predictive variable.
RESULTS:In 57 patients, 49 metastatic lymph nodes and 938 non-metastatic lymph nodes were confirmed by surgical pathology. A total of 163 mediastinal lymph nodes (49 metastatic, 114 non-metastatic) with S≥5 mm were detected on axial CT images. The S, L and S/L of metastatic lymph nodes were significantly higher than those of non-metastatic lymph nodes (P < 0.05). The DECT parameters of metastatic lymph nodes were significantly lower than those of non-metastatic lymph nodes (P < 0.05). The best single morphological parameter for differentiation between metastatic and nonmetastatic lymph nodes was S (AUC, 0.752; threshold, 8.5 mm; sensitivity, 67.4%; specificity, 73.7%; accuracy, 71.8%). The best single DECT parameter for differentiation between metastatic and nonmetastatic lymph nodes was NIC in venous phase (AUC, 0.861; threshold, 0.53; sensitivity, 95.9%; specificity, 70.2%; accuracy, 77.9%). Multivariate analysis showed that S and NIC were independent predictors of lymph node metastasis. The AUC of combined S and NIC in the venous phase was 0.895(sensitivity, 79.6%; specificity, 87.7%; accuracy, 85.3%), which were significantly higher than that of S (P < 0.001) and NIC (P=0.037).
CONCLUSIONS:The ability of quantitative DECT parameters to distinguish mediastinal lymph node metastasis in NSCLC patients is better than that of morphological parameters. Combined S and NIC in venous phase can be used to improve preoperative diagnostic accuracy of metastatic lymph nodes.
