Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Som, P. M.
Right arrow Articles by Lidov, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Som, P. M.
Right arrow Articles by Lidov, M.

Radiology, Vol 187, 593-603, Copyright © 1993 by Radiological Society of North America

REVIEWS

Imaging the postoperative neck

PM Som, ML Urken, H Biller and M Lidov
Department of Radiology, Mount Sinai Medical School, City University of New York, NY.

The variety of cervical lymphadenectomy and neck reconstructive procedures that have been developed in the past 20 years has led to confusion about nomenclature in the literature. In addition, some of these operations result in gross alteration of the normal anatomy. The authors review the present classification system for cervical lymph nodes and various lymphadenectomy and reconstructive procedures. Examples of typical postoperative images are given. A protocol for postoperative follow-up is presented, which calls for imaging for 5 years after surgery. Finally, the authors review their experience with 400 cases, 276 of which were initially classified as having no clinical evidence of disease. Recurrence developed in 68 of these (in 62 [91%] within 4-18 months of surgery). Imaging findings altered the postoperative salvage plan in 17 (25%). Clinically occult disease was found at sectional imaging in 47 (17%).


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
M. G. Fox, L. W. Bancroft, J. J. Peterson, M. J. Kransdorf, S. P. TerKonda, and M. I. O'Connor
MRI appearance of myocutaneous flaps commonly used in orthopedic reconstructive surgery.
Am. J. Roentgenol., September 1, 2006; 187(3): 800 - 806.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Dentomaxillofac RadiolHome page
K Katsura and T Hayashi
Non-neoplastic process after neck dissection demonstrated on enhanced CT in patients with head and neck cancer
Dentomaxillofac. Radiol., September 1, 2005; 34(5): 297 - 303.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
V. Kapoor, M. B. Fukui, and B. M. McCook
Role of 18FFDG PET/CT in the Treatment of Head and Neck Cancers: Posttherapy Evaluation and Pitfalls
Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2005; 184(2): 589 - 597.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Neuroradiol.Home page
J. Chong, L. Ling Chan, H. N. Langstein, and L. E. Ginsberg
MR Imaging of the Muscular Component of Myocutaneous Flaps in the Head and Neck
AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., January 1, 2001; 22(1): 170 - 174.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 1993 by the Radiological Society of North America.