The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Value of Diffusion-weighted MR Imaging for Nodal Staging
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate diffusion-weighted (DW) magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, as compared with turbo spin-echo MR imaging, for the detection of nodal metastases in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was approved by the ethics committee, and patients gave written informed consent. Before undergoing surgery, 33 consecutive patients underwent 1.5-T MR imaging, including DW imaging performed with a wide range of b values (0-1000 sec/mm(2)). The apparent diffusion coefficients (ADCs) of lymph nodes 4 mm or greater in short-axis diameter depicted on images obtained with b values of 0 and 1000 sec/mm(2) were calculated. After topographic correlation, the lymph nodes were evaluated microscopically with prekeratin immunostaining. The optimal ADC thresholds for discriminating between metastatic and benign lymph nodes were determined. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of DW imaging were calculated separately-on per-lymph-node and per-neck-level bases-for all lymph nodes and for supracentimeter and subcentimeter lymph nodes and were compared with corresponding turbo spin-echo MR imaging values. RESULTS: Correlation of histopathologic and radiologic findings was possible for 301 lymph nodes. The ADC derived from the signal intensity averaged across images obtained with b values of 0 and 1000 sec/mm(2) (ADC(b0-1000)) was 1.19 x 10(-3) mm(2)/sec +/- 0.22 (standard deviation) for benign lymph nodes and 0.85 x 10(-3) mm(2)/sec +/- 0.27 for malignant lymph nodes (P < .0001). With an optimal ADC(b0-1000) threshold of 0.94 x 10(-3) mm(2)/sec, 84% sensitivity, 94% specificity, and 91% accuracy for differentiation of malignant versus benign status of each lymph node and 94% sensitivity, 97% specificity, and 97% accuracy for differentiation at each neck level were achieved. Compared with turbo spin-echo imaging, DW imaging had higher sensitivity (76% vs 7%) but slightly lower specificity (94.0% vs 99.5%) for detection of subcentimeter nodal metastases. CONCLUSION: DW imaging performed with ADC(b0-1000) values had higher accuracy than turbo spin-echo MR imaging in nodal staging, providing added value in the detection of subcentimeter nodal metastases.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Separation of diffusion and perfusion in intravoxel incoherent motion MR imaging.
Le Bihan, D., Breton, E., Lallemand, D., Aubin, M. L., Vignaud, J., & Laval-Jeantet, M. (1988) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiology.168.2.3393671 · Cited by 3,169
Diffusion-Weighted MRI in the Body: Applications and Challenges in Oncology
Koh, D.-M., & Collins, D. J. (2007) · American Journal of Roentgenology · doi:10.2214/ajr.06.1403 · Cited by 1,993
(1992) · PubMed Central · doi:10.2967/jnumed.120.251744a · Cited by 1,172
Cervical lymph node metastasis: assessment of radiologic criteria.
van den Brekel, M. W., Stel, H. V., Castelijns, J. A., Nauta, J. J., van der Waal, I., Valk, J., Meyer, C. J., & Snow, G. B. (1990) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiology.177.2.2217772 · Cited by 927
Clinical Applications of PET in Oncology
Rohren, E. M., Turkington, T. G., & Coleman, R. E. (2004) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2312021185 · Cited by 859
Robbins, K. T., Medina, J. E., Wolfe, G. T., Levine, P. A., Sessions, R. B., & Pruet, C. W. (1991) · Archives of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · doi:10.1001/archotol.1991.01870180037007 · Cited by 809
Takahara, T., Imai, Y., Yamashita, T., Yasuda, S., Nasu, S., & CAUTEREN, M. V. (2004) · PubMed · Cited by 781
Head and Neck Lesions: Characterization with Diffusion-weighted Echo-planar MR Imaging
Wang, J., Takashima, S., Takayama, F., Kawakami, S., Saito, A., Matsushita, T., Momose, M., & Ishiyama, T. (2001) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2202010063 · Cited by 566
Comparison of CT and MR imaging in staging of neck metastases.
Curtin, H. D., Ishwaran, H., Mancuso, A. A., Dalley, R. W., Caudry, D. J., & McNeil, B. J. (1998) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiology.207.1.9530307 · Cited by 394
de Bondt, R. B. J., Nelemans, P. J., Hofman, P. A. M., Casselman, J. W., Kremer, B., van Engelshoven, J. M. A., & Beets-Tan, R. G. H. (2007) · European Journal of Radiology · doi:10.1016/j.ejrad.2007.02.037 · Cited by 376
Cited by
Clinical intravoxel incoherent motion and diffusion MR imaging: Past, present, and future
Iima, M., & Le Bihan, D. (2016) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.2015150244 · Cited by 498
Diffusion-weighted MR Imaging in the Head and Neck
Thoeny, H. C., De Keyzer, F., & King, A. D. (2012) · Radiology · doi:10.1148/radiol.11101821 · Cited by 297
Self-citationLi, C.-Y., Klohr, S., Sadick, H., Weiss, C., Hoermann, K., Schoenberg, S. O., & Sadick, M. (2014) · Journal of Nuclear Medicine Technology · doi:10.2967/jnmt.114.141192 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Vandecaveye, V., De Keyzer, F., Vander Poorten, V., Dirix, P., Verbeken, E., Nuyts, S., & Hermans, R.
- Venue
- Radiology
- Published
- 2009-04
- Volume
- 251
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 134-146
- ISSN
- 0033-8419 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-1315
- OpenAlex
- W2115887117
- Cited by
- 340
- References
- 18
- FWCI
- 23.96
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Value of Diffusion-weighted MR Imaging for Nodal Staging. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1148/radiol.2511080128
- The paper
- Vandecaveye, V., De Keyzer, F., Vander Poorten, V., Dirix, P., Verbeken, E., Nuyts, S., & Hermans, R. (2009). Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Value of Diffusion-weighted MR Imaging for Nodal Staging. Radiology. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2511080128
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.