Table 3.
Preoperative radiological staging and histopathological verification of lymph node metastasis in the mesorectum
| Patient 1 | Patient 2 | Patient 3 | Patient 4 | Patient 5 | Patient 6 | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Occurrence | Detected in | Occurrence | Detected in | Occurrence | Detected in | Occurrence | Detected in | Occurrence | Detected in | Occurrence | Detected in | |||||||
| CT | PET/CT | CT | PET/CT | CT | PET/CT | CT | PET/CT | CT | PET/CT | CT | PET/CT | |||||||
| Synchronous LNM | No | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | ||||||||||||
| Perirectal | – | Yes | X | X | – | Yes | X | X | – | Yes | X | X | ||||||
| Inguinal right | – | Yes | Ø | X | – | – | – | – | ||||||||||
| Iliacal right | – | – | – | – | Yes | Ø | X | – | ||||||||||
| Inguinal left | – | Yes | X | X | – | Yes | X | X | – | – | ||||||||
| Iliacal left | – | – | – | – | – | – | ||||||||||||
| LNM in histopathology | No | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | ||||||||||||
| Perirectal (LNM/resLN) | 0/12 | 13/33 | 0/14 | 1/3 | (3/21)a | 1/5 | ||||||||||||
| Synchronous distant metastasis | No | Yes | No | Yes | No | No | ||||||||||||
| Lung/pleura | – | – | – | Yes | X | X | – | – | ||||||||||
| Liver | – | Yes | Ø | X | – | – | – | – | ||||||||||
Detection of perirectal, inguinal, and iliacal lymph node metastases, as well as lung and liver metastases as depicted by contrast-enhanced CT and by 18F-FDG-PET/CT. Additionally, histopathologically verified lymph node metastases in relation to total count of examined lymph nodes are listed
CT computed tomography, PET/CT 18F-FDG PET/CT, LNM lymph node metastasis, resLN total count of resected lymph nodes
aMetachronous LNM, (X) metastatic lesions were detected, (Ø) metastatic lesions were not detected