Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T12:56:50.378Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2009

Robert Hermans
Affiliation:
University Hospital Leuven, Belgium
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Laryngeal and hypopharyngeal neoplasms are squamous cell carcinomas in up to 95% of patients. The most important established risk factor is chronic use of tobacco and alcohol, especially when used in combination. The evaluation of laryngeal and hypopharyngeal tumor extension is based on clinical examination, endoscopic examination and computed tomographic (CT) imaging. Spiral CT and, more recently, multidetector CT offer an accurate examination of the upper aerodigestive tract with the advantage of rapid acquisition of data in a highly reproducible way.

Computed tomographic technique

Scan issues

The primary role of imaging is to evaluate local and locoregional tumor extension, in conjunction with the clinical examination. It is important to evaluate the entire aerodigestive tract because multiple sites of tumor are not rare in these patients. Consequently, CT images are acquired from the nasopharynx to the cervicomediastinal junction.Using multidetector CT (MDCT), images can then be reconstructed to approximately 1 mm. Multiplanar reformatting is then possible for the pharyngolaryngeal area and the cervical lymph nodes areas.

The CT study can be extended to include the thoracomediastinal area to look for other primary tumors or metastatic lesions.

The advantages of modern MDCT include:

  • exploration of the entire pharyngolaryngeal area in a short acquisition time (< 20 s)

  • reduction of motion and deglutition artefacts

  • the possibility of obtaining images during phonation or the Valsalva maneuver

  • the ability to perform multiplanar reformatting in the coronal or sagittal planes

  • optimization of scan timing to obtain optimal tissue contrast medium, particularly relating to the neck vessels

  • comprehensive evaluation of the neck lymph nodes, from the skull base to the supraclavicular area.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Dubrulle, F., Robert, Y., Delerue, C.. Intérêt du scanner spiralé dans la pathologie du larynx et de l'hypopharynx. Feuill radiolog 37 (1997), 118–131.Google Scholar
Hermans, R.. Staging of laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancer: value of imaging studies. Eur Radiol 16 (2006), 2386–2400.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dubrulle, F., Chevalier, D.. Imagerie par scanner hélicoïdal des cancers de l'hypopharynx. Les cahiers d'ORL. T. XXXVI n° 1 (2003).
Chevalier, D., Dubrulle, F., Vilette, B.. Anatomie descriptive, endoscopique et radiologique du larynx. In Encyclopédie Médico Chirurgicale (Paris: Elsevier, 20-630-A-10 2001).Google Scholar
Sobin, L. H., Wittekind, C. (eds.) UICC TNM Classification of Malignant Tumors, 6th edn (New York: Wiley-Liss, 2002), p. 36.
Mancuso, A. A., Mukherji, S. K., Chmalfuss, I., et al. Preradiotherapy computed tomography as a predictor of local control in supraglottic carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 17 (1999), 631–637.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Becker, M.. Larynx and hypopharynx. Radiol Clin North Am 36 (1998), 891–920.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phelps, P. D. Review: carcinoma of the larynx. The role of imaging in staging and pre treatment. Clin Radiol 46 (1993), 77–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, D. E, Mancuso, A. A, Parsons, J. T, Mendenhall, W. M, Million, R. R. Irradiation alone for supraglottic larynx carcinoma: can CT findings predict treatment results?Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 19 (1990), 485–490.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zbären, P., Becker, M., Lang, H.. Pretherapeutic staging of hypopharyngeal carcinoma. Clinical findings, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging compared with histopathologic evaluation. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 123 (1997), 908–913.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Becker, M., Zbären, P., Delavelle, J., et al. Neoplastic invasion of the laryngeal cartilage: reassessment of criteria for diagnosis at CT. Radiology 203 (1997), 521–532.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Curtin, H. D.. Importance of imaging demonstration of neoplastic invasion of laryngeal cartilage. Radiology 194 (1995), 643–644.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mukherji, S. K., Mancuso, A. A., Mendenhall, W., et al. Can pretreatment CT predict local control of T2 glottic carcinomas treated with radiation therapy alone?Am J Neuroradiol 16 (1995), 655–662.Google ScholarPubMed
Becker, M.. Neoplastic invasion of laryngeal cartilage: radiologic diagnosis and therapeutic implications. Eur J Radiol 33 (2000), 216–229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Castelijns, J. A., Becker, M., Hermans, R.. Impact of cartilage invasion on treatment and prognosis of laryngeal cancer. Eur Radiol 6 (1996), 156–169.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hermans, R.. Laryngeal neoplasms. In Head and Neck Cancer Imaging, ed. Hermans, R. (Berlin: Springer, 2006), pp. 43–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbera, L., Groome, P. A., Mackillop, W. J., et al. The role of computed tomography in the T classification of laryngeal carcinoma. Cancer 91 (2001), 394–407.3.0.CO;2-J>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinkamp, H. J., Hosten, N., Richter, C., et al. Enlarged cervical lymph nodes at helical CT. Radiology 191 (1994), 795–798.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Castelijns, J., Brekel, M.. Neck nodal disease. In Head and Neck Cancer Imaging, ed. Hermans, R. (Berlin: Springer, 2006), pp. 293–310.Google Scholar
Curtin, H. D., Ishwaran, H., Mancuso, A. A., et al. Comparison of CT and MR imaging in staging of neck metastases. Radiology 207 (1998), 123–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, M., Zbären, P., Laeng, H., et al. Neoplastic invasion of the laryngeal cartilage. Comparison of MR imaging and CT with histopathologic correlation. Radiology 194 (1995), 661–669.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×