Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Imaging in Melanoma

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Practical Manual for Dermatologic and Surgical Melanoma Management

  • 390 Accesses

Abstract

Imaging plays an important role in the management of patients with melanoma at presentation, staging, follow up and in monitoring the effects of new adjuvant therapies. Pre-operative lymphoscintigraphy accurately identifies sentinel nodes and radiolabels them for surgical removal aided by a gamma probe in sentinel node biopsy. Combined with targeted histopathology this has lifted regional lymph node staging to new levels of accuracy.

Ultrasound using high frequency probes can detect early nodal metastasis before any lump is palpable clinically and guides fine needle biopsy. It also can define the nature of any soft tissue lump that may appear on follow up in node fields or elsewhere.

Cross sectional imaging adds additional precision to the localisation of sentinel nodes aiding their surgical removal. It also plays an important role in upstaging melanoma patients with more advanced disease and in monitoring the effect of adjuvant therapy using anatomical and metabolic criteria.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Morton DL, Wen DR, Wong JH, Economou JS, Cagle LA, Storm FK, et al. Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg. 1992;127(4):392–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Uren RF, Howman-Giles RB, Shaw HM, Thompson JF, McCarthy WH. Lymphoscintigraphy in high-risk melanoma of the trunk: predicting draining node groups, defining lymphatic channels and locating the sentinel node. J Nucl Med. 1993;34(9):1435–40.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Faries MB, Morton DL. Surgery and sentinel lymph node biopsy. Semin Oncol. 2007;34(6):498–508.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. van der Ploeg IM, Valdes Olmos RA, Nieweg OE, Rutgers EJ, Kroon BB, Hoefnagel CA. The additional value of SPECT/CT in lymphatic mapping in breast cancer and melanoma. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(11):1756–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Uren RF, Howman-Giles R, Thompson JF, McCarthy WH, Quinn MJ, Roberts JM, et al. Interval nodes: the forgotten sentinel nodes in patients with melanoma. Arch Surg. 2000;135(10):1168–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Uren RF, Howman-Giles R, Thompson JF. Lymphatic drainage of the skin and breast: locating the sentinel nodes. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  7. McMasters KM, Reintgen DS, Ross MI, Wong SL, Gershenwald JE, Krag DN, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma: how many radioactive nodes should be removed? Ann Surg Oncol. 2001;8(3):192–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Uren RF, Howman-Giles R, Chung DK, Morton RL, Thompson JF. The reproducibility in routine clinical practice of sentinel lymph node identification by pre-operative lymphoscintigraphy in patients with cutaneous melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(2):899–905.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wortsman X. Sonography of the primary cutaneous melanoma: a review. Radiol Res Pract. 2012;2012:814396.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Mescher AL. The immune system & lymphoid organs. In: Junqueira’s basic histology: text and atlas. 15th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Education; 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Vassallo P, Wernecke K, Roos N, Peters PE. Differentiation of benign from malignant superficial lymphadenopathy: the role of high-resolution US. Radiology. 1992;183(1):215–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Vassallo P, Edel G, Roos N, Naguib A, Peters PE. In-vitro high-resolution ultrasonography of benign and malignant lymph nodes: a sonographic-pathologic correlation. Investig Radiol. 1993;28(8):698–705.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Voit C, Akkooi ACJV, Schäfer-Hesterberg G, Schoengen A, Kowalczyk K, Roewert JC, et al. Ultrasound morphology criteria predict metastatic disease of the sentinel nodes in patients with melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(5):847–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Karaman S, Detmar M. Mechanisms of lymphatic metastasis. J Clin Invest. 2014;124(3):922–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Nathanson SD, Shah R, Rosso K. Sentinel lymph node metastases in cancer: causes, detection and their role in disease progression. Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2015;38:106–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sanki A, Uren RF, Moncrieff M, Tran KL, Scolyer RA, Lin HY, et al. Targeted high-resolution ultrasound is not an effective substitute for sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with primary cutaneous melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(33):5614–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bafounta M-L, Beauchet A, Chagnon S, Saiag P. Ultrasonography or palpation for detection of melanoma nodal invasion: a meta-analysis [see comment]. Lancet Oncol. 2004;5(11):673–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Voit CA, Gooskens SLM, Siegel P, Schaefer G, Schoengen A, Röwert J, et al. Ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration cytology as an addendum to sentinel lymph node biopsy can perfect the staging strategy in melanoma patients. Eur J Cancer. 2014;50(13):2280–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Faries MB, Thompson JF, Cochran AJ, Andtbacka RH, Mozzillo N, Zager JS, et al. Completion dissection or observation for sentinel-node metastasis in melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(23):2211–22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Cui X, Ignee A, Nielsen MB, Schreiber-Dietrich D, De Molo C, Pirri C, et al. Contrast enhanced ultrasound of sentinel lymph nodes. J Ultrasonogr. 2013;13(52):73–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Grootendorst DJ, Steenbergen W, Manohar S, Ruers TJ. Optical techniques for the intraoperative assessment of nodal status. Future Oncol. 2013;9(11):1741–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Xing Y, Bronstein Y, Ross MI, Askew RL, Lee JE, Gershenwald JE, et al. Contemporary diagnostic imaging modalities for the staging and surveillance of melanoma patients: a meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103(2):129–42.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Gershenwald JE, Scolyer RA. Melanoma staging: American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 8th edition and beyond. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25(8):2105–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Gershenwald JE, Scolyer RA, Hess KR, Sondak VK, Long GV, Ross MI, et al. Melanoma staging: evidence-based changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67(6):472–92.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Ho Shon IA, Chung DK, Saw RP, Thompson JF. Imaging in cutaneous melanoma. Nucl Med Commun. 2008;29(10):847–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Yancovitz M, Finelt N, Warycha MA, Christos PJ, Mazumdar M, Shapiro RL, et al. Role of radiologic imaging at the time of initial diagnosis of stage T1b-T3b melanoma. Cancer. 2007;110(5):1107–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Wagner JD, Schauwecker DS, Davidson D, Wenck S, Jung SH, Hutchins G. FDG-PET sensitivity for melanoma lymph node metastases is dependent on tumor volume. J Surg Oncol. 2001;77(4):237–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Petersen H, Holdgaard PC, Madsen PH, Knudsen LM, Gad D, Gravergaard AE, et al. FDG PET/CT in cancer: comparison of actual use with literature-based recommendations. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43(4):695–706.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Harris MT, Berlangieri SU, Cebon JS, Davis ID, Scott AM. Impact of 2-deoxy-2[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose Positron Emission Tomography on the management of patients with advanced melanoma. Mol Imaging Biol. 2005;7(4):304–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Yang HL, Liu T, Wang XM, Xu Y, Deng SM. Diagnosis of bone metastases: a meta-analysis comparing 18FDG PET, CT, MRI and bone scintigraphy. Eur Radiol. 2011;21(12):2604–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Swetter S, Carroll L, Johnson D, Segall G. 9:45-10:00. Positron emission tomography (PET) is superior to computerized tomography (CT) for metastatic staging in melanoma patients. Clin Positron Imaging. 2000;3(4):154.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Iwano S, Ito S, Tsuchiya K, Kato K, Naganawa S. What causes false-negative PET findings for solid-type lung cancer? Lung Cancer. 2013;79(2):132–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(2):228–47.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Litiere S, Isaac G, De Vries EGE, Bogaerts J, Chen A, Dancey J, et al. RECIST 1.1 for response evaluation apply not only to chemotherapy-treated patients but also to targeted cancer agents: a pooled database analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37:1102–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Seymour L, Bogaerts J, Perrone A, Ford R, Schwartz LH, Mandrekar S, et al. iRECIST: guidelines for response criteria for use in trials testing immunotherapeutics. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18(3):e143–e52.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. McArthur GA, Puzanov I, Amaravadi R, Ribas A, Chapman P, Kim KB, et al. Marked, homogeneous, and early [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography responses to vemurafenib in BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(14):1628–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Kong BY, Menzies AM, Saunders CA, Liniker E, Ramanujam S, Guminski A, et al. Residual FDG-PET metabolic activity in metastatic melanoma patients with prolonged response to anti-PD-1 therapy. Pigment Cell Melanoma Res. 2016;29(5):572–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Trotter SC, Sroa N, Winkelmann RR, Olencki T, Bechtel M. A global review of melanoma follow-up guidelines. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2013;6(9):18–26.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Salama AK, de Rosa N, Scheri RP, Pruitt SK, Herndon JE 2nd, Marcello J, et al. Hazard-rate analysis and patterns of recurrence in early stage melanoma: moving towards a rationally designed surveillance strategy. PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e57665.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Benvenuto-Andrade C, Oseitutu A, Agero AL, Marghoob AA. Cutaneous melanoma: surveillance of patients for recurrence and new primary melanomas. Dermatol Ther. 2005;18(6):423–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Xing Y, Cromwell KD, Cormier JN. Review of diagnostic imaging modalities for the surveillance of melanoma patients. Dermatol Res Pract. 2012;2012:941921.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Faries MB, Thompson JF, Cochran AJ, Andtbacka RH, Mozzillo N, Zager JS, et al. Completion dissection or observation for sentinel-node metastasis in melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2017;1(23):2211–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Danielsen M, Hojgaard L, Kjaer A, Fischer BM. Positron emission tomography in the follow-up of cutaneous malignant melanoma patients: a systematic review. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;4(1):17–28.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. DeRose ER, Pleet A, Wang W, Seery VJ, Lee MY, Renzi S, et al. Utility of 3-year torso computed tomography and head imaging in asymptomatic patients with high-risk melanoma. Melanoma Res. 2011;21(4):364–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Alfred Nuclear Medicine and Ultrasound, RPAH Medical Center, Newtown, NSW, Australia

    Roger F. Uren, David Chung & Kevin London

  2. Melanoma Institute Australia, North Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Roger F. Uren, David Chung & Kevin London

  3. Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Roger F. Uren, David Chung & Kevin London

Authors
  1. Roger F. Uren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Chung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kevin London
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Dermatology, Department of Medicine, Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, CA, USA

    Delphine J. Lee

  2. Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Mark B. Faries

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Uren, R.F., Chung, D., London, K. (2021). Imaging in Melanoma. In: Lee, D., Faries, M. (eds) Practical Manual for Dermatologic and Surgical Melanoma Management. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27400-9_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27400-9_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-27399-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-27400-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation