Abstract
Purpose
We evaluated the effectiveness of multidetector-row computed tomography (MD-CT) for detecting axillary lymph nodal status (ALNS) in patients with breast cancer.
Methods
We reviewed 42 patients with breast cancer. A metastatic lymph node on MD-CT was defined as oval or round, with more than 5 mm on the short axis. We evaluated ALNS preoperatively by both palpation and MD-CT findings and performed sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) and complete axillary lymph node dissection (ALND).
Results
For establishing the ALNS, MD-CT showed a sensitivity of 76.9%, a specificity of 96.6%, and an accuracy of 90.5%. On the basis of the MD-CT findings, misdiagnosis was made in 4 of the 42 patients, only one of which was false positive. On the other hand, one patient with a histologically negative sentinel lymph node (SLN) result had metastasis only in a non-SLN. Preoperative MD-CT showed a positive node in this patient.
Conclusions
Multidetector-row computed tomography assists in identifying women who require ALND without SLNB, with sufficient positive predictive value. Falsenegative detection by SLNB could be avoided with careful interpretation of the axillary lymph nodes shown by MD-CT.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Fujita T, Doihara H, Takabatake D, Takahashi H, Yoshitomi S, Ishibe Y, et al. Multidetector row computed tomography for diagnosing intraductal extension of breast carcinoma. J Surg Oncol 2005;91:10–16.
Murakami S. Multi-detector row CT in the assessment of axillary lymph node metastasis in breast cancer (in Japanese with English abstract). Jpn J Med Imaging 2003;22:9–20.
Hata Y, Ogawa Y, Nishioka A, Inomata T, Yoshida S, Toki T. Evaluation of thin section CT scanning in the prone position of metastatic axillary lymph nodes for breast cancer (in Japanese with English abstract). Nippon Igaku Hoshasen Gakkai Zasshi 1996;56:1027–1031.
Tohnosu N, Okuyama K, Koide Y, Kikuchi T, Awano T, Matsubara H, et al. A comparison between ultrasonography and mammography, computed tomography and digital subtraction angiography for the detection of breast cancers. Surg Today 1993;23:704–710.
Bruneton JN, Caramella E, Hery M, Aubanel D, Manzino JJ, Picard JL. Axillary lymph node metastases in breast cancer: preoperative detection with US. Radiology 1986;158:325–326.
Yang WT, Ahuja A, Tang A, Suen M, King W, Metreweli C. High resolution sonographic detection of axillary lymph node metastases in breast cancer. J Ultrasound Med 1996;16:241–246.
Feu J, Tresserra F, Fabregas R, Navarro B, Grases PJ, Suris JC, et al. Metastatic breast carcinoma in axillary lymph nodes: in vitro US detection. Radiology 1997;205:831–835.
Cody HS 3rd. Clinical aspects of sentinel node biopsy. Breast Cancer Res 2001;3:104–108.
Suzuki M, Nagashima T, Yagata H, Hashimoto H, Shishikura T, Imanaka N, et al. Computed tomographic evaluation of axillary lymph node metastases from breast cancer (in Japanese with English abstract). Nippon Rinsyo Geka Gakkai Zasshi 1999;60:898–903.
Nishie H, Hirooka Y, Kaibara N, Shiota S. A preliminary study of diagnosis of lymph nodes metastasis of breast cancer by preoperative CT scan (in Japanese with English abstract). Nippon Rinsyo Geka Gakkai Zasshi 2000;61:1118–1122.
Yuen S, Goto M, Sawai K, Nishimura T. CT-based sentinel lymph node identification and size criteria in breast cancer (in Japanese). Radiol Front 2003;6:25–28.
Lovrics PJ, Chen V, Coates G, Cornacchi SD, Goldsmith CH, Law C, et al. A prospective evaluation of positron emission tomography scanning, sentinel lymph node biopsy, and standard axillary dissection for axillary staging in patients with early stage breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2004;11:846–853.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ogasawara, Y., Doihara, H., Shiraiwa, M. et al. Multidetector-row computed tomography for the preoperative evaluation of axillary nodal status in patients with breast cancer. Surg Today 38, 104–108 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-007-3589-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00595-007-3589-2