Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 340

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

Vandecaveye, Vincent, De Keyzer, Frederik, Vander Poorten, Vincent, Dirix, Piet, Verbeken, Eric, Nuyts, Sandra, Hermans, Robert·2009·Radiology

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1148/radiol.2511080128

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 18 references

Cited by

See all 340

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.