{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03418054338299737, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010517090271691499, 'mean_word_length': 6.049382716049383, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 2, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparative analysis of imaging modalities in the preoperative assessment of nodal metastasis in esophageal cancer

Preoperative radiological findings of nodal status in 74 patients, using endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), computed tomography (CT), ultrasonography (US), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), were compared to histopathology reports following transthoracic total esophagectomy with radical lymphadenectomy (TTE), involving complete dissection of the mediastinal and abdominal nodes and lower cervical lymph nodes. Accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of each radiological investigation were calculated for each anatomic group of nodes. Statistical analysis revealed that EUS is more accurate and significantly more sensitive (P < 0.01) for lymph nodes along the right recurrent laryngeal nerve and those in the upper and mid‐periesophageal, infracarinal locations. Paratracheal and lower paraesophageal nodes are assessed better using CT whereas MRI is better for mid‐paraesophageal and infra‐aortic nodes. US is most accurate and sensitive for evaluation of cervical and abdominal nodes (P < 0.01). © 1996 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.