ArticleJournal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR2014
Characterization of cervicofacial lymphnodes - a clinical and ultrasonographic study.
Article in Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of lymph node findings in patients with and without odontogenic infection: A clinical and ultrasonographic study.Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal · 2024Article
- Overview of Ultrasound in Dentistry for Advancing Research Methodology and Patient Care Quality with Emphasis on Periodontal/Peri-implant Applications.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2023Review
- Diagnostic ability of contrast-enhanced computed tomography for metastatic cervical nodes in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas: significance of additional coronal reconstruction images.Polish journal of radiology · 2020Article
- Article
- Ultrasonographic Appearances of Cervical Lymph Nodes in Healthy Turkish Adults Subpopulation: Preliminary Study.The open dentistry journal · 2017Article
- Ultrasonography and contrast-enhanced CT findings of tularemia in the neck.Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLymph nodes undergo reactive changes in response to a wide variety of stimuli, the most common cause being inflammatory and immune reactions, apart from primary malignant neoplasms and metastatic tumours. It is well accepted that a clinical examination alone cannot be considered diagnostic to justify the involvement of cervicofacial lymph nodes especially deep and small nodes. Ultrasonography is an easy, reproducible, non invasive, non-ionizing imaging modality to evaluate cervicofacial lymph nodes.
aimThe present study was devised with an aim of comparing the clinical and ultrasonographic features of cervicofacial lymphadenopathy. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe subjects for the study were selected from the patients who visited the outpatient department with clinically palpable lymph nodes. Fifty two patients were included in the study and they were divided into 4 groups; group I (subjects with odontogenic infections), group II (subjects with non odontogenic oral conditions), group III (subjects with tuberculosis) and group IV (subjects with head and neck carcinomas). A detailed case history was recorded and a thorough clinical examination was carried out for all subjects. The cervicofacial lymph nodes were palpated and examined. Ultrasonographic examination of cervicofacial lymph nodes was carried out and recorded. The statistical analysis was done using chi square test. RESULT AND
conclusionMost of the subjects considered for the study showed cervicofacial lymphadenopathy associated with odontogenic causes, specific infections like tuberculosis and head and neck malignancies. The lymph nodes showed varied clinical features. The ultrasonographic features such as number, size, shape, short axis/long axis ratio, border sharpness, hilum, echogenicity, distribution of the internal echoes, intranodal necrosis, matting or soft tissue edema were evaluated. The results were tabulated and statistical analysis was done.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.