Literature DB >> 12780886

Rectal endosonography can distinguish benign rectal lesions from invasive early rectal cancers.

M Starck1, M Bohe, M Simanaitis, L Valentin.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether an experienced ultrasound examiner, using good ultrasound equipment with high multifrequency probes, can discriminate between a high grade or low grade dysplastic adenoma (pT0) and very early invasive rectal cancers (pT1). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Sixty consecutive patients with clinically possibly pT0 or pT1 rectal tumours referred for transanal local excision underwent endorectal ultrasound examination. Lesions where the endorectal ultrasound image showed the mucosal layer to be expanded but the submucosal layer to be intact (uT0) were considered to represent a low grade or high grade dysplasia adenoma (pT0). An irregularity or disruption of the submucosal layer (uT1) was considered to characterize early invasive rectal cancers (pT1). The ultrasound staging was compared with the histological staging made on the basis of the diagnoses in the excised specimens.
RESULTS: The histopathological diagnoses were: invasive rectal cancer (n = 18, 10 pT1, 4 pT2, 4 pT3 cancers); high grade dysplastic adenoma (n = 21); low grade dysplastic adenoma (n = 18); non adenomatous benign lesions (n = 3). Endorectal ultrasound incorrectly classified two of the invasive cancers (both pT1 tumours) as noninvasive lesions. Five of 42 pT0 tumours were overstaged as uT1 tumours. Overstaging was more common in patients who had undergone a previous excision and in tumours with peritumoral inflammation and desmoplastic reaction. The sensitivity of endorectal ultrasound with regard to invasive cancer was 89% (16/18), specificity 88% (37/42), positive predictive value 76% (16/21), negative predictive value 95% (37/39), and accuracy 88% (53/60). Among pT0 and pT1 tumours, the corresponding figures were 80% (8/10), 88% (37/42), 62% (8/13), 95% (37/39), and 87% (45/52).
CONCLUSION: Endorectal ultrasound can distinguish between noninvasive lesions and invasive rectal cancers clinically of stage pT0 or pT1.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12780886     DOI: 10.1046/j.1463-1318.2003.00416.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Colorectal Dis        ISSN: 1462-8910            Impact factor:   3.788


  7 in total

1.  Endorectal ultrasound: its role in the diagnosis and treatment of rectal cancer.

Authors:  Bret R Edelman; Martin R Weiser
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2008-08

2.  How useful is endorectal ultrasound in the management of early rectal carcinoma?

Authors:  D Mondal; M Betts; C Cunningham; N J Mortensen; I Lindsey; A Slater
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2014-06-24       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Does a learning curve exist in endorectal two-dimensional ultrasound accuracy?

Authors:  O J Morris; B Draganic; S Smith
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2011-07-09       Impact factor: 3.781

4.  The role of 3-D endorectal ultrasound in rectal cancer: our experience.

Authors:  Nikola Y Kolev; Anton Y Tonev; Valentin L Ignatov; Aleksander K Zlatarov; Vasil M Bojkov; Tanya D Kirilova; Elitsa Encheva; Krasimir Ivanov
Journal:  Int Surg       Date:  2014 Mar-Apr

5.  Endorectal ultrasonography versus phased-array magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative staging of rectal cancer.

Authors:  Ahmet-Mesrur Halefoglu; Sadik Yildirim; Omer Avlanmis; Damlanur Sakiz; Adil Baykan
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-06-14       Impact factor: 5.742

6.  The role of endoscopic ultrasound in the evaluation of rectal cancer.

Authors:  Ali A Siddiqui; Yomi Fayiga; Sergio Huerta
Journal:  Int Semin Surg Oncol       Date:  2006-10-18

Review 7.  When is local excision appropriate for "early" rectal cancer?

Authors:  Kotaro Maeda; Yoshikazu Koide; Hidetoshi Katsuno
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2013-11-21       Impact factor: 2.549

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.