Pathologic lymph node results and the risk factors of malignancy in the patients who presented with cervical lymphadenopathy at Otolaryngology department, Phatthalung hospital

Authors

  • พรปณิธาน สมเจริญวัฒนา โรงพยาบาลสุราษฎร์ธานี

Keywords:

cervical lymphadenopathy, lymph node biopsy, risk factors of malignancy

Abstract

              Objective: This study was conducted in order to achieve accuracy diagnosis and the best treatment for the patients who presented with cervical lymphadenopathy. A patient characteristic, age, gender, location of lymph node, size of lymph node, pathological results and the risk factors of malignancy were determined.
              Materials and methods: This is a retrospective descriptive study and the medical record reviewed of 140 patients who underwent cervical lymph node biopsy between the period of January 2010 and May 2017 at Otolaryngology unit, Patthalung hospital. Inclusion criteria is neck node unknown primary or cervical lymphadenopathy, which did not improve after treatment 4 weeks. Data recorded were collected including; gender, age, location and size of lymph node and pathological results. Statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS version 11. A p-value <0.05 was accepted as statistically significant. Categorical variables were presented as percentages.
              Results: A total 140 patients with cervical lymphadenopathy were collected. Females were 53.57% whereas 46.43% were male. According to age group, the common pathological result in a range of 0-15 year-old is reactive hyperplasia (69.57%), the common pathological result in a range of 15-60 year-old is caseous granulomatous (55.56%). In this age group, 4 patients also have positive HIV test and 1 patient has concomitant with diabetes mellitus and the common pathological result in patients who were over 60 year-old is lymphoma (48%). All patients in this age group have negative results of HIV test and just only one patient has concomitant with diabetes mellitus. The risk factors of malignancy are male (risk ratio 2.04), patients over the age of 45 years (50%, risk ratio 5.86). The risk of malignancy when the size of lymph node over 2 cm. (67.44%,risk ratio 9.35). Submandibular area is the most potential location to be the risk of malignancy (80%, risk ratio 3.54) and the most common malignancy cell type is lymphoma. According to the pathological results of cervical lymphadenopathy, caseous granulomatous is the common pathology at cervical, supraclavicular and submental area (39.13%, 52.94 and 100%, respectively). At the submandibular area, lymphoma was found in 80%.
              Conclusion : Cervical lymphadenopathy is the common finding in all age groups and it is the challenging clinical presentations for diagnosing and management. Cervical lymphadenopathy can occur for a number of causes including infection, benign, malignancy, autoimmune, drug induced or iatrogenic. The complete history taking, meticulous physical examination and the risk evaluation are essential for early diagnosing and management of patients who presented with cervical lymphadenopathy. The fundamental data from this study is important and necessary for counseling and planning of the best treatment to the patients who attend in otolaryngology unit at Patthalung hospital. According to pathological results, the most common benign cell type of cervical lymphadenopathy is caseous granulomatous, the most common malignant cell type of cervical lymphadenopathy is lymphoma and the most common cell type in childhood is reactive hyperplasia.

References

Ozakan EA, Goret CC, Ozdemir ZT. Evaluation of peripheral lymphadenopathy with Excisional biopsy : six-year experience.Int J Clin Exp Pathol; 2015;8 (11) : 15234-9.

Franzen A, Gunzel T, Buchali A. Etiologic and differential diagnosis significance of tumor location in the supraclavicular fossa.Laeyngoscope ;2017

Ramzy I, Rone R, Schultenover SJ. Lymph node aspiration biopsy.Diagnostic reliability and limitations an analysis of 350 cases,Diagn Cytopathol;1985 ;1(1):39-45.

Mohseni S, Shojaiefard A, Khorgami Z. Peripheral lymphadenopathy : approach and diagnostic tools. Iran J Med Sci; 2014; 39(suppl2):158-170.

Gaddy HL, Riegel AM, Unexplained Lymphadenopathy; evaluation and differential Diagnosis.Am Fam Physician; 2016; 94(11);896-903.

Farndon S, Behjati S, Jonas N.How to use lymph node biopsy in paediatrics. Arch Dis Child Edu Pract Ed.2017.

Locke R, Comfort R, Kubba H.When dues an enlarged cervical lymph node in a child need excision.Int J Peadiatr Otorhinolaryngol;2014 ;78(3):393-401.

Rajasekaran K, Krakoviz P. Enlarged neck lymph nodes in children.Pediatr Cli North Am; 2013 ;60(4):923-36.

Ressenberg TL, Nolder AR. Pediatric cervical lymphadenopathy. Otolyngol Clin North Am;2014 ;45 (5):721-31.

Karadeniz C, Oquz A, Ezer U,Oztuk G, Dursun A. The etiology of peripheral lymphadenopathy in children. Pediatr hematol Oncol;1999;16(6):525-31.

Yaris N, Cakir M, Zosen E, Cobanoglu U. Analysis of children with peripheral lymphadenopathy.Clin Pediatr; 2006; 45(6):544-9.

Ferrer R. Lymphadenopathy ;Differntial diagnosis and evaluation. Am Fam Physician;1998 ;58(6):1331-20.

Boalak S, Varkal MA, Yildiz l.cervical lymphadenopathies in clinical cohort study. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol; 2016;82:81-7.

Ingolfsdottir M, Belle V, Hahn CH. Evaluation of cervical lymphadenopathy in children:advantages and drawbaks of diagnostic methods. Dan Med J; 2013 ;60(8):A4667.

Ahuja AT, Ying M, Sonographic evaluation of cervical lymph nodes. AJR AM J Roentgenol; 2005;184:1691-1699.

Sakai O, Curtin HD, Romo LV, Som PM. Lymph node pathology. Benign proliferative,lymphoma and metastactic disease>Radiol Clin North Am;2000;38 (5):979-98.

Richner S, Laifer G. Peripheral lymphadenopathy in immunocompetent Adults.Swiss Med Wkly; 2010;140-104.

Chau I, Kelleher MT, Cunningham D, Norman AR Rapid access multidisciplinary lymph node diagnostic clinic : analysis of 550 patients. Br J Cancer;2003;88:354-361.

Stani J .Cytologic diagnosis of reactive lymphadenopathy in fine needle aspiration biopsy specimens.Acta cytol; 1987;31(1):8-13.

Steel BL, Schwartz MR, Ramzy I. Fine needle aspiration biopsy in the diagnosis of lymphadenopathy in 1103 patients. Role ,limitations and analysis of diagnostic
pitfalls. Acta Cytol;1995;39(1):76-81.

Reddy DL, venter WD,Pather S. Patterns of Lymph node pathology;Fine needle aspiration biopsy as an evaluation Tool for Lymphadenopathy : A retrospective
Descriptive Study Conducted at the Largest Hospital in Africa.PLoS One; 2015;10(6).

Bazemore AW, Smucker DR. Lymphadenopathy and malignancy . Am Fam Physician; 2002;88:354-361.

Ferrer R, Lymphadenopathy:differential diagnostis and evaluation. Am FAM Physician;1998;58:1313-1320.

knight PJ, Mulne AF, Vassy LE. when is lymph node biopsy indicated in children with enlarged peripheral nodes? Pediatrics;1982;69:391-396.

Twist CJ, Link MP. Assessment of lymphadenopathy in children. Pediatr Clin Morth Am; 2002;49:1009-1025.

Slap GB,Brooks JS, Schwartz JS. When to perform biopsies of enlarged peripheral lymph nodes in young patients.JAMA; 1984;252:1321-1326.

Mohan GB, Reddy MK, Phaneendra BV. A etiology of peripheral lymphad- enopathy in adults : Analysis of 1724 cases seen at tertiary care teaching hospital
in southern India.Natl Med ; 2007;20:78-80

Naz E, Mirza T, Aziz S Frequency and clinicopathologic correlation of different types of non Hodgkin’s lymphoma according to WHO classification.J Pak
Med Assoc; 2011;61:260-263.

Downloads

Published

2019-02-14

How to Cite

สมเจริญวัฒนา พ. (2019). Pathologic lymph node results and the risk factors of malignancy in the patients who presented with cervical lymphadenopathy at Otolaryngology department, Phatthalung hospital. Region 11 Medical Journal, 32(4), 1407–1418. Retrieved from https://he02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/Reg11MedJ/article/view/176632

Issue

Section

Original articles