Detail
Article
Online article
FT
Medvik - BMC
  • Something wrong with this record ?

Ultrasound characteristics of a symptomatic and asymptomatic lymphocele after pelvic and/or paraaortic lymphadenectomy

V. Weinberger, D. Fischerova, I. Semeradova, J. Slama, D. Cibula, M. Zikan,

. 2019 ; 58 (2) : 266-272. [pub] -

Language English Country Taiwan

Document type Journal Article

Grant support
NV17-32030A MZ0 CEP Register

OBJECTIVE: To describe the sonographic characteristics of a lymphocele after pelvic and/or paraaortic lymphadenectomy for gynecological malignancy, analyze and identify ultrasound characteristics related to the symptomatic and asymptomatic lymphoceles. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of ultrasound examination data collected consecutively in patients after pelvic and/or paraaortic lymphadenectomy in one institution. We recorded the number of lymphoceles, localization, size; ultrasound morphology following International Ovarian Tumor Analysis group classification and symptoms. RESULTS: We described and analyzed 227 lymphoceles (150 asymptomatic and 77 symptomatic) in 161 patients. The asymptomatic lymphocele is typically a thick-walled cystic lesion without vascularization, round and unilocular with anechoic or ground-glass content. The symptomatic lymphocele is typically an oval, or ovoid, unilocular lesion with low-level or anechoic content (ground glass content is unlikely to be present, p < 0.001) and the presence of debris and septations. The lymphocele size (p = 0.001), number of lymphoceles (>1) (p = 0.005), septa (p = 0.002), and debris (p < 0.001) were independent ultrasound features correlating to symptoms development. More than one lymphocele (p = 0.047), septations (p = 0.007) and presence of debris (p < 0.001) were independent ultrasound features correlated to infection. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound features of symptomatic and asymptomatic lymphocele differ. The clues for lymphocele differential diagnosis are the history of lymphadenectomy and the finding cystic lesion with typically ultrasound features of lymphocele, adjacent to great pelvic vessels. Unique ultrasound features of lymphocele may help to distinguish from tumor relapse, hematoma, abscess, seroma or urinoma.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc19027687
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20190816120607.0
007      
ta
008      
190813s2019 ch f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1016/j.tjog.2019.01.018 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)30910151
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a ch
100    1_
$a Weinberger, Vit $u Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Masaryk University, Faculty of Medicine, Jihlavska 20, 625 00, Brno, Czech Republic.
245    10
$a Ultrasound characteristics of a symptomatic and asymptomatic lymphocele after pelvic and/or paraaortic lymphadenectomy / $c V. Weinberger, D. Fischerova, I. Semeradova, J. Slama, D. Cibula, M. Zikan,
520    9_
$a OBJECTIVE: To describe the sonographic characteristics of a lymphocele after pelvic and/or paraaortic lymphadenectomy for gynecological malignancy, analyze and identify ultrasound characteristics related to the symptomatic and asymptomatic lymphoceles. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of ultrasound examination data collected consecutively in patients after pelvic and/or paraaortic lymphadenectomy in one institution. We recorded the number of lymphoceles, localization, size; ultrasound morphology following International Ovarian Tumor Analysis group classification and symptoms. RESULTS: We described and analyzed 227 lymphoceles (150 asymptomatic and 77 symptomatic) in 161 patients. The asymptomatic lymphocele is typically a thick-walled cystic lesion without vascularization, round and unilocular with anechoic or ground-glass content. The symptomatic lymphocele is typically an oval, or ovoid, unilocular lesion with low-level or anechoic content (ground glass content is unlikely to be present, p < 0.001) and the presence of debris and septations. The lymphocele size (p = 0.001), number of lymphoceles (>1) (p = 0.005), septa (p = 0.002), and debris (p < 0.001) were independent ultrasound features correlating to symptoms development. More than one lymphocele (p = 0.047), septations (p = 0.007) and presence of debris (p < 0.001) were independent ultrasound features correlated to infection. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound features of symptomatic and asymptomatic lymphocele differ. The clues for lymphocele differential diagnosis are the history of lymphadenectomy and the finding cystic lesion with typically ultrasound features of lymphocele, adjacent to great pelvic vessels. Unique ultrasound features of lymphocele may help to distinguish from tumor relapse, hematoma, abscess, seroma or urinoma.
650    _2
$a senioři $7 D000368
650    _2
$a asymptomatické nemoci $7 D058070
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a nádory ženských pohlavních orgánů $x chirurgie $7 D005833
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a longitudinální studie $7 D008137
650    _2
$a lymfadenektomie $x statistika a číselné údaje $7 D008197
650    _2
$a lymfokela $x diagnostické zobrazování $x patologie $7 D008210
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _2
$a retrospektivní studie $7 D012189
650    12
$a ultrasonografie $7 D014463
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Fischerova, Daniela $u Gynecological Oncology Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Charles University - First Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital, Apolinarska 18, 128 00 Prague, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Semeradova, Ivana $u Gynecological Oncology Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Charles University - First Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital, Apolinarska 18, 128 00 Prague, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Slama, Jiri $u Gynecological Oncology Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Charles University - First Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital, Apolinarska 18, 128 00 Prague, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Cibula, David $u Gynecological Oncology Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Charles University - First Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital, Apolinarska 18, 128 00 Prague, Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Zikan, Michal $u Gynecological Oncology Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Charles University - First Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital, Apolinarska 18, 128 00 Prague, Czech Republic; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Charles University - First Faculty of Medicine and Na Bulovce Hospital, Budinova 67/2, 181 00 Prague, Czech Republic. Electronic address: michal.zikan@lf1.cuni.cz.
773    0_
$w MED00167593 $t Taiwanese journal of obstetrics & gynecology $x 1875-6263 $g Roč. 58, č. 2 (2019), s. 266-272
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30910151 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20190813 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20190816120837 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1432836 $s 1066147
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2019 $b 58 $c 2 $d 266-272 $e - $i 1875-6263 $m Taiwanese journal of obstetrics and gynecology $n Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol $x MED00167593
GRA    __
$a NV17-32030A $p MZ0
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20190813

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...