1naresh

Array
(
    [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array
        (
            [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity
            [type] => guest
            [service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org
            [access-type] => Controlled
            [privilege] => Array
                (
                    [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array
                        (
                            [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege
                            [type] => privilege-set
                            [privilege-set] => GUEST
                        )

                )

            [credentials] => Array
                (
                    [method] => guest
                )

        )

)
1nareshArray
(
    [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array
        (
            [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity
            [type] => guest
            [service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org
            [access-type] => Controlled
            [privilege] => Array
                (
                    [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array
                        (
                            [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege
                            [type] => privilege-set
                            [privilege-set] => GUEST
                        )

                )

            [credentials] => Array
                (
                    [method] => guest
                )

        )

)

Table 2: Imaging characteristics of 28 patients with LEC of the salivary gland
Characteristics No. of Patients/Values
Tumor location 
    Parotid 18 (64.3%)
    Submandibular gland 8 (28.5%)
    Palate 1 (3.6%)
    Sublingual gland 1 (3.6%)
Tumor size (cm) 1.6∼7 (3.5)
Tumor margin 
    Partially defined 13 (46.4%)
    Well-defined 5 (17.9%)
    Ill-defined 10 (35.7%)
Morphologic patterns 
    Type 1 5 (17.9%)
    Type 2 16 (57.1%)
    Type 3 7 (25.0%)
Inner nature 
    Necrosis 4 (14.3%)
    Calcification 0 (0%)
Density on unenhanced CT (n = 23) 
    Slightly hypodense 19 (82.6%)
    Isodensity 4 (17.4%)
Enhancement degree on CT (n = 23) 
    Poor 6 (26.1%)
    Moderate 14 (56.5%)
    Intense 3 (17.4%)
Signal intensity on MR imaging (n = 6) 
    T1WI 
        Hyperintense 1 (16.7%)
        Isointense 5 (83.3%)
    T2WI 
        Hypointense 4 (66.7%)
        Hyperintense 2 (33.3%)
Enhancement degree on MR imaging (n = 6) 
    Poor 1 (16.7%)
    Moderate 4 (66.6%)
    Intense 1 (16.7%)
Inner nature after contrast enhancement 
    Homogeneous 16 (57.1%)
    Heterogeneous 12 (42.9%)
Adjacent structure invasion 5 (17.9%)
    Bone destroyed 2 (7.1%)
Pathologic lymph nodes 17 (60.7%)