AIM: To evaluate the value of miniprobe sonography (MPS), spiral CT and MR imaging (MRI) in the tumor and regional lymph node staging of esophageal cancer. METHODS: Eight-six patients (56 men and 30 women; age range of 39-73 years, mean 62 years) with esophageal carcinoma were staged preoperatively with imaging modalities. Of them, 81 (94 %) had squamous cell carcinoma, 4(5 %) adenocarcinoma, and 1(1 %) adenoacanthoma. Eleven patients (12 %) had malignancy of the upper one third, 41 (48 %) of the mid-esophagus and 34 (40 %) of the distal one third. Forty-one were examined by spiral CT in whom 13 were co-examined by MPS, and forty-five by MRI in whom 18 were also co-examined by MPS. These imaging results were compared with the findings of the histopathologic examination for resected specimens. RESULTS: In staging the depth of tumor growth, MPS was significantly more accurate (84 %) than spiral CT and MRI (68 % and 60 %, respectively, P<0.05). The specificity and sensitivity were 82 % and 85 % for MPS; 60 % and 69 % for spiral CT; and 40 % and 63 % for MRI, respectively. In staging regional lymph nodes, spiral CT was more accurate (78 %) than MPS and MRI (71 % and 64 %, respectively), but the difference was not statistically significant. The specificity and sensitivity were 79 % and 77 % for spiral CT; 75 % and 68 % for MPS; and 68 % and 62 % for MRI, respectively. CONCLUSION: MPS is superior to spiral CT or MRI for T staging, especially in early esophageal cancer. However, the three modalities have the similar accuracy in N staging. Spiral CT or MRI is helpful for the detection of far-distance metastasis in esophageal cancer.
AIM: To evaluate the value of miniprobe sonography (MPS), spiral CT and MR imaging (MRI) in the tumor and regional lymph node staging of esophageal cancer. METHODS: Eight-six patients (56 men and 30 women; age range of 39-73 years, mean 62 years) with esophageal carcinoma were staged preoperatively with imaging modalities. Of them, 81 (94 %) had squamous cell carcinoma, 4(5 %) adenocarcinoma, and 1(1 %) adenoacanthoma. Eleven patients (12 %) had malignancy of the upper one third, 41 (48 %) of the mid-esophagus and 34 (40 %) of the distal one third. Forty-one were examined by spiral CT in whom 13 were co-examined by MPS, and forty-five by MRI in whom 18 were also co-examined by MPS. These imaging results were compared with the findings of the histopathologic examination for resected specimens. RESULTS: In staging the depth of tumor growth, MPS was significantly more accurate (84 %) than spiral CT and MRI (68 % and 60 %, respectively, P<0.05). The specificity and sensitivity were 82 % and 85 % for MPS; 60 % and 69 % for spiral CT; and 40 % and 63 % for MRI, respectively. In staging regional lymph nodes, spiral CT was more accurate (78 %) than MPS and MRI (71 % and 64 %, respectively), but the difference was not statistically significant. The specificity and sensitivity were 79 % and 77 % for spiral CT; 75 % and 68 % for MPS; and 68 % and 62 % for MRI, respectively. CONCLUSION:MPS is superior to spiral CT or MRI for T staging, especially in early esophageal cancer. However, the three modalities have the similar accuracy in N staging. Spiral CT or MRI is helpful for the detection of far-distance metastasis in esophageal cancer.
Authors: T Nishimaki; O Tanaka; N Ando; H Ide; H Watanabe; M Shinoda; W Takiyama; H Yamana; K Ishida; K Isono; M Endo; T Ikeuchi; T Mitomi; H Koizumi; M Imamura; T Iizuka Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 1999-12 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: M Giovannini; G Monges; J F Seitz; V Moutardier; D Bernardini; P Thomas; G Houvenaeghel; J R Delpero; R Giudicelli; P Fuentes Journal: Endoscopy Date: 1999-09 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: H Yanai; T Yoshida; T Harada; Y Matsumoto; M Nishiaki; T Shigemitsu; M Tada; K Okita; T Kawano; S Nagasaki Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 1996-11 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: G E Kallimanis; P K Gupta; F H al-Kawas; L T Tio; S B Benjamin; M E Bertagnolli; C C Nguyen; M N Gomes; D E Fleischer Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 1995-06 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Francesco Giganti; Alessandro Ambrosi; Maria C Petrone; Carla Canevari; Damiano Chiari; Annalaura Salerno; Paolo G Arcidiacono; Roberto Nicoletti; Luca Albarello; Elena Mazza; Francesca Gallivanone; Luigi Gianolli; Elena Orsenigo; Antonio Esposito; Carlo Staudacher; Alessandro Del Maschio; Francesco De Cobelli Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2016-10-21 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Frederic Di Fiore; Stephane Lecleire; Olivier Rigal; Marie-Pierre Galais; Emmanuel Ben Soussan; Isabelle David; Bernard Paillot; Jacques-Henri Jacob; Pierre Michel Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2006-07-14 Impact factor: 5.742