C H Chen1, L J Tseng, C C Yang, Y H Yeh. 1. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Changhua Show-Chwan Memorial Hospital, 542, Section 1, Chung-Shang Road, Changhua 500, Taiwan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare the sensitivity of endoscopic sonography (EUS), transabdominal sonography (US), and CT in the detection of, local staging of, and prediction of vascular involvement by or distant metastasis from periampullary tumors. METHODS: Seventy-four consecutive patients with presumed periampullary tumors were evaluated by EUS, US, and CT during a 3.25-year period. The local staging accuracy of the modalities was assessed in the 36 patients with solid tumors who underwent surgery. The sensitivity of the modalities in predicting vascular involvement and distant metastasis was assessed in the 56 patients with carcinomas. RESULTS: EUS was the most sensitive modality in the detection (EUS, 97%; US, 24%; and CT, 39%; p < 0.001 for EUS versus US or CT) and T classification (EUS, 72%; US, 11%; CT, 22%; p < 0.001 for EUS versus US or CT) of periampullary tumors. EUS also had better sensitivity than US in detecting lymph node metastasis from periampullary cancers (EUS, 47%; US, 7%; and CT, 33%; p = 0.02 for EUS versus US; p = 0.7 for EUS versus CT). The accuracy of EUS in determining the T classification (without stent, 81%; with stent, 65%) and N classification (without stent, 80%; with stent, 70%) tended to decrease in the presence of an endobiliary stent, but the differences were not significant. EUS was the most sensitive modality in demonstrating vascular involvement (EUS, 100%; US, 0%; and CT, 33%; p = 0.002 for EUS versus US; p = 0.03 for EUS versus CT) but was not significantly different in detecting distant metastasis (EUS, 11%; US, 44%; and CT, 44%). CONCLUSIONS: EUS is superior to US and CT in the local assessment of periampullary tumors. The staging accuracy of EUS is minimally but not significantly affected by the presence of an endobiliary stent. Copyright 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare the sensitivity of endoscopic sonography (EUS), transabdominal sonography (US), and CT in the detection of, local staging of, and prediction of vascular involvement by or distant metastasis from periampullary tumors. METHODS: Seventy-four consecutive patients with presumed periampullary tumors were evaluated by EUS, US, and CT during a 3.25-year period. The local staging accuracy of the modalities was assessed in the 36 patients with solid tumors who underwent surgery. The sensitivity of the modalities in predicting vascular involvement and distant metastasis was assessed in the 56 patients with carcinomas. RESULTS: EUS was the most sensitive modality in the detection (EUS, 97%; US, 24%; and CT, 39%; p < 0.001 for EUS versus US or CT) and T classification (EUS, 72%; US, 11%; CT, 22%; p < 0.001 for EUS versus US or CT) of periampullary tumors. EUS also had better sensitivity than US in detecting lymph node metastasis from periampullary cancers (EUS, 47%; US, 7%; and CT, 33%; p = 0.02 for EUS versus US; p = 0.7 for EUS versus CT). The accuracy of EUS in determining the T classification (without stent, 81%; with stent, 65%) and N classification (without stent, 80%; with stent, 70%) tended to decrease in the presence of an endobiliary stent, but the differences were not significant. EUS was the most sensitive modality in demonstrating vascular involvement (EUS, 100%; US, 0%; and CT, 33%; p = 0.002 for EUS versus US; p = 0.03 for EUS versus CT) but was not significantly different in detecting distant metastasis (EUS, 11%; US, 44%; and CT, 44%). CONCLUSIONS: EUS is superior to US and CT in the local assessment of periampullary tumors. The staging accuracy of EUS is minimally but not significantly affected by the presence of an endobiliary stent. Copyright 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Authors: Wiriyaporn Ridtitid; Suzette E Schmidt; Mohammad A Al-Haddad; Julia LeBlanc; John M DeWitt; Lee McHenry; Evan L Fogel; James L Watkins; Glen A Lehman; Stuart Sherman; Gregory A Coté Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2014-10-05 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Lilian C Azih; Brett L Broussard; Milind A Phadnis; Martin J Heslin; Mohamad A Eloubeidi; Shayam Varadarajulu; Juan Pablo Arnoletti Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2013-01-28 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Frances Tse; Jeffrey S Barkun; Joseph Romagnuolo; Gad Friedman; Jeffrey D Bornstein; Alan N Barkun Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2006 Impact factor: 3.647