Skip to main content

Table 2 Sentinel lymph node assessment and diagnostic confidence values in cases in the lower extremities

From: Contribution of dynamic sentinel lymphoscintigraphy images to the diagnosis of patients with malignant skin neoplasms in the upper and lower extremities

Patient

Reviewer A (expert radiologist)

Reviewer B (trainee radiologist)

 

Diagnostic confidence value

Assessment

Diagnostic confidence value

Assessment

 

Only static

Static & dynamic

 

Only static

Static & dynamic

 
 

Groin

Poples

External iliac

Groin

Poples

External iliac

 

Groin

Poples

External iliac

Groin

Poples

External iliac

 

1

1

2

 

2

3

 

I

1

3

  

3

 

C

2

3

  

3

   

3

  

3

   

3

3

  

3

 

3

C

3

  

3

   

4

3

  

3

   

3

  

3

   

5

3

  

3

   

3

  

3

   

6

1

  

3

  

I

2

  

2

   

7

3

  

3

 

2

C

3

  

3

   

8

3

3

 

3

3

  

1

3

 

3

3

 

I

9

3

  

3

   

3

  

3

   

10

3

  

3

   

3

  

3

   

11

3

  

3

   

3

  

3

   

12

1

3

 

3

3

 

I

2

2

 

3

3

 

I

13

3

  

3

   

3

  

3

   

14

3

3

 

3

3

  

2

3

 

3

3

 

I

15

3

3

2

3

3

3

I

3

  

3

   

16

1

3

 

3

3

 

I

 

3

  

3

  

17

 

3

 

3

3

 

C

 

3

  

3

  

18

3

  

3

   

3

  

3

   

19

3

3

 

3

1

 

D

3

  

3

   

20

3

  

3

   

3

  

3

   

21

3

  

3

   

2

  

3

  

I

Sentinel node sites

20/21

8/21

1/21

21/21

8/21

3/21

 

19/21

6/21

0/21

18/21

6/21

0/21

 

%

95.2

38.1

4.8

100

38.1

14.3

 

90.5

28.6

0

85.7

28.6

0

 
  1. C: Assessment of sentinel lymph node was changed with observation of dynamic images.
  2. I: Diagnostic confidence value increased with the observation of dynamic images.
  3. D: Diagnostic confidence value declined with the observation of dynamic images.