Dergiler / The Journal of Pediatric Research / 2018 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 3

Lymphadenopathies: An Annoyance or Not?

Sayfa
144–148
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

If there is no change in lymph node size in the follow-up, further studies shouldbe performed.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cases hospitalized with lymphadenopathy in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics, lymphnode involvement regions, infection markers and their diagnoses.Materials and Methods: The medical records of 56 children with lymphadenopathy between 2014 and 2017 were reviewed retrospectively at EgeUniversity, Children’s Hospital, General Pediatrics Unit.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Laboratory tests including complete blood count, sedimentation rates and other biochemical parameters were measured.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:If there is no change in lymph node size in the follow-up, further studies shouldbe performed.
🔬Tür:Literatür & Derleme Çalışması
📍Kapsam:2014 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cases hospitalized with lymphadenopathy in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics, lymphnode involvement regions, infection markers and their diagnoses.Materials and Methods: The medical records of 56 children with lymphadenopathy between 2014 and 2017 were reviewed retrospectively at EgeUniversity, Children’s Hospital, General Pediatrics Unit. Demographic characteristics, clinical findings and accompanying complaints of the caseswere examined. Laboratory tests including complete blood count, sedimentation rates and other biochemical parameters were measured. Lymphnodes were assessed via ultrasonographic examination in terms of distribution, number, size and structure. Lymph node regions were described asanterior or posterior cervical, supraclavicular, submandibular, axillary, epitrochlear, inguinal or popliteal. Laboratory results, microbiological studiesand histopathological examination results of the patients were evaluated.Results: Among the 56 patients enrolled in the study, 31 (55.4%) were male, 25 (44.6%) were female and the median age was 3.7±7.1 years. Themost frequent involvement location of the enlarged lymph nodes was the cervical area. Others occurred in the axillary, inguinal or supraclavicularregions. The median results of the white blood cell, C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rates were 13.670±9760/mm3, 1.9±5.4 mg/dLand 42±51 mm/h respectively. Ultrasonographic evaluation showed that lymph nodes were diagnosed with reactive hyperplasia in 69.6%, suppurativelymphadenopathy in 23.2% and suspected malignancy in 7.1%. Most of the cases with lymphadenopathy resulted from a benign condition.Conclusion: Lymphadenopathy is a common complaint of childhood, mostly benign. The etiology should be elucidated using full history, carefulphysical examination, follow-up, laboratory and imaging methods. A good physical examination and follow-up of the clinical features of the lymphnode are more important than the laboratory and imaging methods. If there is no change in lymph node size in the follow-up, further studies shouldbe performed.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

GÖKÇE, Ş., KURUGÖL, N. Z., KOTUROĞLU, G. (2018). Lymphadenopathies: An Annoyance or Not?. The Journal of Pediatric Research, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 3, 144–148. https://ajindex.com/articles/362916

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (14)

  1. Olgun N. Çocukluk çağı lenf bezleri. İrken G, Özkan H, Aydın A, editörler. Pediatri Kliniğe Giriş, 1. baskı, DEU Rektörlük Matbaası, İzmir, 2001.p.71-93.
  2. Kelly CS, Kelly RE. Lymphadenopathy in children. Pediatr Clin North Am 1998;45:875-88.
  3. Twist CJ, Link MP. Assessment of lymphadenopathy in children. Pediatr Clin North Am 2002;49:1009-25. Ferrer R. Lymphadenopathy: differential diagnosis and evaluation. Am Fam Physician 1998;58:1313-20.
  4. Thorell EA, Chesney P. Cervical lymphadenitis and neck infections. In: Long S, Pickering L Prober C (eds). Principles and practice of pediatric infectious diseases. 2nd ed. New York: Churchill Livingstone, 2008:143. Friedmann AM. Evaluation and management of lymphadenopathy in children. Pediatr Rev 2008;29:53-60.
  5. Oguz A, Karadeniz C, Temel EA, Çağlar C Elvan, Okur V. Evaluation of peripheral lymphadenopathy in children. Pediatric Hematology and Oncology 2006;23:549-61.
  6. Moore SW, Schneider JW, Schaaf HS. Diagnostic aspects of cervical lymphadenopathy in children in the developing world: a study of 1,877 surgical specimens. Pediatr Surg Int 2003;19:240-4.
  7. Özkan EA, Göret CC, Özdemir ZT, et al. Evaluation of peripheral lymphadenopathy with excisional biopsy: six-year experience. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2015;8:15234-9.
  8. Kumral A, Olgun N, Uysal KM, Corapcioğlu F, Oren H, Sarialioğlu F. Assessment of peripheral lymphadenopathies: experience at a pediatric hematology-oncology department in Turkey. Pediatr Hematol Oncol 2002;19:211-8.
  9. Pangalis GA, Vassilakopoulos TP, Boussiotis VA, Fessas P. Clinical approach to lymphadenopathy. Semin Oncol 1993;20:570-82.
  10. Mohseni S, Shojaiefard A, Khorgami Z, Alinejad S, Ghorbani A, Ghafouri A. Peripheral lymphadenopathy: approach and diagnostic tools. Iran J Med Sci 2014;39(2 Suppl):158-70.
  11. Habermann TM, Steensma DP. Lymphadenopathy. Mayo Clin Proc 2000;75:723-32. Karnath BM. Approach to the patient with lymphadenopathy. Hospital physician 2005;41:29-33. Gaines H, von Sydow M, Pehrson PO, Lundbegh P. Clinical picture of primary HIV infection presenting as a glandular-feverlike illness. BMJ 1988;297:1363-8.
  12. Kojima M, Matsuda H, Iijima M, Yoshida K, Masawa N, Nakamura S. Reactive hyperplasia with giant follicles in lymph node lesions from systemic lupus erythematosus patients. Report of three cases. APMIS 2005;113:558-63.
  13. Slap GB, Brooks JS, Schwartz JS. When to perform biopsies of enlarged peripheral lymph nodes in young patients. JAMA 1984;252:1321-6.
  14. Soldes OS, Younger JG, Hirschl RB. Predictors