Journal of computer assisted tomography · 2017
Computed Tomography Features of Appendiceal Metastasis in Patients With Underlying Malignancy: Comparison With Pathological Findings.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяВалидационное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Nam Mi Yeon, Kim Mi Young, Kim Yeo Ju, Suh Chang Hae, Chu Young Chae, Lee Dae Hyung, Cho Jae Sung
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the computed tomography (CT) findings compared with pathologic features and to determine whether CT findings are useful for diagnosis of appendiceal metastasis in patients with underlying malignancy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Preoperative CT examinations of 59 patients who had underlying malignancy and underwent appendectomy were evaluated. Appendiceal metastasis (n = 21) and nonmetastasis (n = 38) were pathologically confirmed. Computed tomography features (appendiceal morphology and diameter, presence of ascites, rectal shelf, omental cake, lymphadenopathy or organ metastasis) were retrospectively reviewed, and compared with histopathological findings. Fisher exact test and Wilcoxon rank sum test were performed for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: Mean diameter of appendiceal metastasis was significantly larger (9.1 mm) than that of nonmetastasis (5.2 mm), (P < 0.0001). The CT morphology of appendiceal metastasis showed broad spectrum, and 3 cases of nodular thickening was only detected in appendiceal metastasis. There was a significant difference between groups (P = 0.0102). Appendiceal metastasis was more frequently associated with peritoneal seeding (ascitis, rectal shelf, omental cake) than nonmetastasis (P < 0.0001). Histopathological invasion of appendiceal metastasis was more frequently seen in serosa-mesoappendix (n = 20, 100%) or muscularis propria (n = 17, 85%), than in submucosa (n = 10, 50%) or mucosa layer (n = 7, 35%). Acute appendicitis was more commonly detected in metastasis (n = 4) than in nonmetastasis (n = 1) (P = 0.0495).
CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of CT features of appendix and peritoneum may be useful for prediction of appendiceal metastasis in patients with underlying malignancy.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Preoperative CT examinations of 59 patients who had underlying malignancy and underwent appendectomy were evaluated. Appendiceal metastasis (n = 21) and nonmetastasis (n = 38) were pathologically confirmed. Computed tomography features (appendiceal morphology and diameter, presence of ascites, rectal shelf, omental cake, lymphadenopathy or organ metastasis) were retrospectively reviewed, and compared with histopathological findings. Fisher exact test and Wilcoxon rank sum test were performed for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: Mean diameter of appendiceal metastasis was significantly larger (9.1 mm) than that of nonmetastasis (5.2 mm), (P < 0.0001). The CT morphology of appendiceal metastasis showed broad spectrum, and 3 cases of nodular thickening was only detected in appendiceal metastasis. There was a significant difference between groups (P = 0.0102). Appendiceal metastasis was more frequently associated with peritoneal seeding (ascitis, rectal shelf, omental cake) than nonmetastasis (P < 0.0001). Histopathological invasion of appendiceal metastasis was more frequently seen in serosa-mesoappendix (n = 20, 100%) or muscularis propria (n = 17, 85%), than in submucosa (n = 10, 50%) or mucosa layer (n = 7, 35%). Acute appendicitis was more commonly detected in metastasis (n = 4) than in nonmetastasis (n = 1) (P = 0.0495).
CONCLUSIONS: Evaluation of CT features of appendix and peritoneum may be useful for prediction of appendiceal metastasis in patients with underlying malignancy.