Indian Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Home | About IJNM | Search | Current Issue | Past Issues | Instructions | Ahead of Print | Online submissionLogin 
Indian Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  Editorial Board | Subscribe | Advertise | Contact
Users Online: 2170 Print this page  Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size

 Table of Contents     
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 33  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 266-267  

Reply by the author

Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism Narayana Health City, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India

Date of Web Publication11-Jun-2018

Correspondence Address:
Subramanian Kannan
Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism Narayana Health City, Bengaluru
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0972-3919.234135

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Kannan S. Reply by the author. Indian J Nucl Med 2018;33:266-7

How to cite this URL:
Kannan S. Reply by the author. Indian J Nucl Med [serial online] 2018 [cited 2022 Jan 21];33:266-7. Available from:

Dear Reader

Thank you very much for showing interest in our article. The point wise reply to your queries is as under:

1. Did the authors perform CCLND (prophylactic and therapeutic) and what proportion of these patients had recurrence?

CCLND was carried out in patients with clearly documented level VI nodes on pre-operative ultrasound or CT scan. For those with no clearly identifiable nodes, a meticulous inspection of the central compartment was undertaken by the surgical team and converted in to a central compartment dissection if there was on-table evidence of abnormal lymph nodes or frozen section was positive for a metastatic lymph node.

The current article is not targeted to study the recurrence rate of the above approach and we are looking at long term follow up of our cohort and will be interested in sharing this details once we have collected them.

2. Did any of the patients have foci of poorly differentiated carcinoma?

None of our patients included in this study had poorly differentiated or anaplastic thyroid cancer in the final pathology. We had 8 patients with tall cell variant PTC, 2 Hurtle cell cancers and 2 widely invasive FVPTC. We agree that in patients with poorly differentiated thyroid cancer reliability of thyroglobulin or anti-Tg becomes low and multi-modal imaging is often used to see the response to treatment.

3. How many Patients had metastasis at the time of presentation? Did any of these patients have Contrast Enhanced CT scan as pre-operative imaging?

Twenty four patients presented with lymph node metastasis in the lateral compartment of the neck, one patient presented with a chest wall mass and two patients presenting with Lung lesions on pre-operative chest X-Ray. All patients with bulky lymph nodal metastasis and those with distant metastasis underwent CT neck and chest/abdomen as part of pre-operative work up. Radio-iodine scan was deferred by at least 3 months after these scans.

4. Did any of these patients haveraisingTg level with no finding on iodine whole body scan which necessitated PET scan?

Two patients with TENIS syndrome (Tg levels 181 and 420 ng/ml with negative antibodies) had negative Iodine scan and underwent PET-CT scan which also did not show metastatic disease. Both these patients have undergone empirical radio-iodine therapy, post therapy scan being negative. These patients are on follow up with close monitoring of Tg and neck imaging.


    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

  In this article

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded71    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal