Preview

Ultrasound & Functional Diagnostics

Advanced search

Comparison of different ultrasound approaches in tongue tumor thickness determination

https://doi.org/10.24835/1607-0771-2018-2-75-86

Abstract

Ultrasound examination was performed in 93 patients (15-85 years old) with malignant tumors of the tongue body in order to compare different ultrasound approaches (intraoral, submandibular, and transbuccal) in tumor thickness assessment. Histological investigation with tumor thickness assessment was carried out in all patients. Coincidence of histological and ultrasound measurements was considered as correct if measurement error was ±15%. Percentage error was calculated as % of difference between ultrasound and histological measurements (histological measurements always were taken as 100%; percentage error module was used for analysis). There were no significant differences between results of histological and ultrasound tongue tumor thickness measurements with the use of intraoral, submandibular, and transbuccal approaches. There were no significant differences in tongue tumor thickness value between intraoral, submandibular, and transbuccal ultrasound measurements (with acceptable measurement error ±15%). Significant differences in tongue tumor thickness associated with malignant tumors character (primary or recurrent) were found with the use of intraoral approach (with acceptable measurement error ±15%) (P = 0.01). Ultrasound examination with the use of intraoral, submandibular, and transbuccal approaches can be used for accurate malignant tongue tumors thickness determination, which may affect the treatment.

About the Authors

G. F. Allakhverdieva
N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center
Russian Federation


G. T. Sinyukova
N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center
Russian Federation


V. N. Sholokhov
N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center
Russian Federation


L. P. Yakovleva
A.S. Loginov Moscow Clinical Scientific Center
Russian Federation


O. A. Saprina
N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center
Russian Federation


T. Yu. Danzanova
N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center
Russian Federation


E. A. Gudilina
N.N. Blokhin Russian Cancer Research Center
Russian Federation


References

1. Shah J., Patel S.G. Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology. Edinburg: Mosby, 2007. 731 p.

2. Pinto F.R., de Matos L.L., Palermo F.C., Kulsar M.A., Cavalheiro B.G., de Mello E.S., Alves V.A., Cernea C.R., Brandao L.G. Tumor thickness as an independent risk factor of early recurrence in oral cavity squamous cell carcin oma // Eur. Arch. Otorhinolaryngol. 2014. V. 271. No. 6. P. 1747-1754. Doi: 10.1007/s00405-013-2704-9.

3. Аллахвердиева Г.Ф., Синюкова Г.Т., Шолохов В.Н., Яковлева Л.П., Саприна О.А., Данзанова Т.Ю., Гудилина Е.А., Дронова Е.Л. Современные подходы к диагностике плоскоклеточного рака полости рта и ротоглотки // Ультразвуковая и функциональная диагностика. 2016. № 6. С. 87-95.

4. S. V., Rohan V. Cervical node metastasis in T1 squamous cell carcinoma of oral tongue - pattern and the predictive factors // Indian J. Surg. Oncol. 2014. V. 5. No. 2. P. 104-108. Doi: 10.1007/s13193-014-0301-z.

5. Balasubramanian D., Erbahimi A., Gupta R., Gao K., Elliot M., Palme C.E., Clark J.R. Tumour thickness as a predictor of nodal metastases in oral cancer: comparison between tongue and floor of mouth subsites // Oral Oncol. 2014. V. 50. No. 12. P. 1165-1168. Doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.

6. Lodder W.L., Pameijer F.A., Rasch C.R., van den Brekel M.W., Balm A.J. Prognostic significance of radiologically determined neck node volume in head and neck cancer: a systematic review // Oral Oncol. 2012. V. 48. No. 4. P. 298-302. Doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2011.11.001.

7. Stambuk H.E., Karimi S., Lee N., Patel S.G. Oral cavity and oropharynx tumors // Radiol. Clin. North Am. 2007. V. 45. No. 1. P. 1-20. Doi: 10.1016/j.rcl.2006.10.010.

8. King K.G., Kositwattanarerk A., Genden E., Kao J., Som P.M., Kostakoglu L. Cancers of the oral cavity and oropharynx: FDG PET with contrast-enhanced CT in the posttreatment setting // Radiographics. 2011. V. 31. No. 2. P. 355-373. Doi: 10.1148/rg.312095765.

9. Keberle M., Jenett M., Hahn D. Clinical trial on the accuracy of a freehand and sensor-independent three-dimensional power Doppler ultrasound system measuring diameters, volumes and vascularity of malignant primaries of the neck // Ultraschall Med. 2001. V. 22. No. 2. P. 91-95.

10. Yesuratnam A., Wiesenfeld D., Tsui A., Iseli T.A., Hoorn S.V., Ang M.T., Guiney A., Phal P.M. Preoperative evaluation of oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma with intraoral ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging-comparison with histopathological tumour thickness and accuracy in guiding patient management // Int. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2014. V. 43. No. 7. P. 787-794. Doi: 10.1016/j.ijom.2013.12.009.

11. Аллахвердиева Г.Ф., Синюкова Г.Т., Кропотов М.А., Мудунов А.М., Яковлева Л.П., Саприна О.А., Танеева А.Ш., Шолохов В.Н., Данзанова Т.Ю., Лепэдату П.И., Костякова Л.А., Гудилина Е.А., Бердников С.Н., Махотина М.С. Ультразвуковая диагностика рака языка. Определение глубины инвазии опухоли // Злокачественные опухоли. 2015. № 4. Спецвыпуск 2. С. 49-52. Doi: 10.18027/2224-5057-2015-4s2-49-52.

12. Klein Nulent T.J.W., Noorlag R., Van Cann E.M., Pameijer F.A., Willems S.M., Yesuratnam A., Rosenberg A.J.W.P., de Bree R., van Es R.J.J. Intraoral ultrasonography to measure tumor thickness of oral cancer: A systematic review and metaanalysis // Oral Oncol. 2018. V. 77. P. 29-36. Doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2017.12.007.


Review

For citations:


Allakhverdieva G.F., Sinyukova G.T., Sholokhov V.N., Yakovleva L.P., Saprina O.A., Danzanova T.Yu., Gudilina E.A. Comparison of different ultrasound approaches in tongue tumor thickness determination. Ultrasound & Functional Diagnostics. 2018;(2):75-86. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24835/1607-0771-2018-2-75-86

Views: 106


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 1607-0771 (Print)
ISSN 2408-9494 (Online)