RESUMEN
Neck dissection is a surgical procedure reserved for thyroid cancer cases with clinically evident lymphatic invasion. Although neck dissection is a reliable and safe procedure, it can determine a significant morbidity involving a variety of structures of nervous, vascular and endocrine typology. A careful pre-operative study is therefore essential to better plan surgery. Surgical experience, combined with accurate surgical preparation and merged with adequate and specific techniques, can certainly help reduce the percentage of complications. In recent years, however, technology has also proved to be useful. Its crucial role was already recognized in the safeguard of the integrity of the laryngeal nerve through neuro-monitoring, but new technologies are emerging to help the preservation also of the parathyroid glands and other structures, such as the thoracic duct. These surgical skills combined with the latest technological advancements, that allow us to reduce the incidence of complications after neck dissection for thyroid cancer, will be reported in the present article. This topic is of significant interest for the endocrine and metabolic surgeons' community.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: MRI plays a crucial role to identify men with a high likelihood of clinically significant prostate cancer who require immediate biopsy. The added value of DCE MRI in combination with T2-weighted imaging and DWI is controversial (risks related to gadolinium administration, duration of MR exam, financial burden, effects on diagnostic performance). A comparison of a biparametric and a standard multiparametric MR imaging protocol, taking into account the different experience of the readers, may help to choose the best MR approach regarding diagnostic performance. PURPOSE: To determine the added value of dynamic contrasted-enhanced imaging (DCE) over T2-weighted imaging (T2-WI) and diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer, and to evaluate how it affects the diagnostic performance of three readers with different grade of experience in prostate imaging. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-five patients underwent prostate MR examination at 1.5â¯T MR scanner performed because of elevated prostate-specific antigen level and/or suspicion of prostate cancer at digital rectal examination. Two MR images sets (Set 1â¯=â¯biparametric, Set 2â¯=â¯multiparametric) were retrospectively and independently scored by three radiologists with 7, 3 and 1 years of experience in prostate MR imaging respectively, according to PI-RADS v2. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were calculated by dichotomizing reader scores. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed and areas under the curve (AUCs) were calculated for each reader and image set. A comparison of ROC curves was performed to test the difference between the areas under the ROC curves among the three readers. RESULTS: There was no significant difference regarding the detection of clinically significant tumor among the three readers between the two image sets. The AUC for the bi-parametric and multi-parametric MR imaging protocol was respectively 0.68-0.72 (Reader 1), 0.72-0.70 (Reader 2) and 0.60-0.54 (Reader 3). ROC curve comparison revealed no statistically significant differences for each protocol among the most experienced (Reader 1) and the other readers (Readers 2-3). CONCLUSION: The diagnostic accuracy of a bi-parametric MR imaging protocol consisting of T2-weighted imaging and DWI is comparable with that of a standard multi-parametric imaging protocol for the detection of clinically significant prostate cancer. The experience of the reader does not significantly modify the diagnostic performance of both MR protocols.