Literature DB >> 12917769

Positron emission tomography for staging esophageal cancer: does it lead to a different therapeutic approach?

Werner Kneist1, Mathias Schreckenberger, Peter Bartenstein, Frank Grünwald, Katja Oberholzer, Theodor Junginger.   

Abstract

Accurate preoperative staging is essential for the indication and selection of the appropriate surgical procedure in patients with esophageal cancer. The present prospective study was designed to determine if the preoperative use of (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) increases the accuracy of staging esophageal cancer compared with computed tomography (CT) and if it thereby leads to a different therapeutic approach. A total of 58 patients, 46 men and 12 women (mean age 61 years), with histologic proof of esophageal carcinoma underwent FDG-PET of the neck, chest, and abdomen, as well as CT of the chest and abdomen, to determine tumor stage. FDG-PET and CT data were compared with each other and with pathohistologic findings. Sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy for detecting histologically verified lymph node and distant metastases were calculated for FDG-PET and CT. FDG-PET showed a higher specificity, whereas CT had higher accuracy for detecting both abdominal (73% vs. 59%) and thoracic (73% vs. 63%) lymph node metastases. The accuracy of detecting blood-borne and lymphatic distant metastases was identical for CT and FDG-PET imaging (50%). FDG-PET had a higher specificity than CT (87% vs. 13%) but lower sensitivity (35% vs. 67%). FDG-PET did not provide new information on the indication for surgery, nor was it helpful for choosing the appropriate surgical procedure in patients with esophageal carcinoma. In view of the relatively high cost of FDG-PET examinations, the use of this modality is indicated primarily in patients with inconclusive CT findings or for scientific research projects. Higher sensitivity as a result of tumor-affinity radiopharmaceuticals and optimized apparatus resolution, in addition to the advantages offered by whole-body PET scanning, may lead to new indications for this staging procedure in the future.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12917769     DOI: 10.1007/s00268-003-6921-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Surg        ISSN: 0364-2313            Impact factor:   3.352


  19 in total

Review 1.  [Staging of carcinomas of the upper gastrointestinal tract. The current status of diagnostic imaging].

Authors:  P Pokieser; M Memarsadeghi; M Danzer; R Prokesch; B Partik; E Wenzl
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 0.635

2.  Evaluation of distant metastases in esophageal cancer: 100 consecutive positron emission tomography scans.

Authors:  J D Luketich; D M Friedman; T L Weigel; M A Meehan; R J Keenan; D W Townsend; C C Meltzer
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 4.330

3.  Improved detection of individual nodal involvement in squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus by FDG PET.

Authors:  J Y Choi; K H Lee; Y M Shim; K S Lee; J J Kim; S E Kim; B T Kim
Journal:  J Nucl Med       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 10.057

4.  Positron emission tomography of esophageal carcinoma using (11)C-choline and (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose: a novel method of preoperative lymph node staging.

Authors:  O Kobori; Y Kirihara; N Kosaka; T Hara
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1999-11-01       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Staging of esophageal carcinoma: comparison of results with endoscopic sonography and CT.

Authors:  V Vilgrain; D Mompoint; L Palazzo; Y Menu; B Gayet; P Ollier; H Nahum; F Fekete
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1990-08       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  [Spiral computerized tomography of esophageal carcinoma--methodology, problems, results].

Authors:  H U Kauczor; P Mildenberger; A Heintz; F Schweden; H H Schild
Journal:  Aktuelle Radiol       Date:  1994-11

7.  Comparison between positron emission tomography and computed tomography in the use of the assessment of esophageal carcinoma.

Authors:  Hiroyuki Kato; Hiroyuki Kuwano; Masanobu Nakajima; Tatsuya Miyazaki; Minako Yoshikawa; Hitoshi Ojima; Katsuhiko Tsukada; Noboru Oriuchi; Tomio Inoue; Keigo Endo
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2002-02-15       Impact factor: 6.860

8.  The utility of positron emission tomography for the diagnosis and staging of recurrent esophageal cancer.

Authors:  P Flamen; A Lerut; E Van Cutsem; J P Cambier; A Maes; W De Wever; M Peeters; P De Leyn; D Van Raemdonck; L Mortelmans
Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 5.209

9.  Computed tomography and positron emission tomography in the pre-operative staging of oesophageal carcinoma.

Authors:  S C Rankin; H Taylor; G J Cook; R Mason
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 2.350

10.  Positron emission tomography for staging of oesophageal and gastroesophageal malignancy.

Authors:  A C Kole; J T Plukker; O E Nieweg; W Vaalburg
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  14 in total

1.  Inclusion of PET-CT into planning of primary or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy of esophageal cancer improves prognosis.

Authors:  Jan-Christopher Metzger; Daniel Wollschläger; Matthias Miederer; Peter Vaupel; Markus Moehler; Heinz Schmidberger; Arnulf Mayer
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2017-08-02       Impact factor: 3.621

2.  Significant clinical impact and prognostic stratification provided by FDG-PET in the staging of oesophageal cancer.

Authors:  Cuong P Duong; Helen Demitriou; Leann Weih; Anne Thompson; David Williams; Robert J S Thomas; Rodney J Hicks
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2006-02-10       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  Advantages of FDG-PET/CT over CT alone in the preoperative assessment of lymph node metastasis in patients with esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Ryuichi Karashima; Masayuki Watanabe; Yu Imamura; Satoshi Ida; Yoshifumi Baba; Shiro Iwagami; Yuji Miyamoto; Yasuo Sakamoto; Naoya Yoshida; Hideo Baba
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2014-06-28       Impact factor: 2.549

4.  Comparison of positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and endoscopic ultrasound in the initial staging of patients with esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Val J Lowe; Fargol Booya; J G Fletcher; Mark Nathan; Eric Jensen; Brian Mullan; Eric Rohren; Maurits J Wiersema; Enrique Vazquez-Sequeiros; Joseph A Murray; Mark S Allen; Michael J Levy; Jonathan E Clain
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2005 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.488

5.  2-deoxy-2-[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose-positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging evaluation of esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Hossein Jadvar; Robert W Henderson; Peter S Conti
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2006 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.488

6.  CT and MR imaging for detecting neoplastic invasion of esophageal inlet.

Authors:  Bin Chen; Shan-Kai Yin; Qi-Xin Zhuang; Ying-Sheng Cheng
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2005-01-21       Impact factor: 5.742

7.  Detection and staging of esophageal cancers.

Authors:  Kenneth K Wang
Journal:  Curr Opin Gastroenterol       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 3.287

Review 8.  Role of ¹⁸F 2-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in upper gastrointestinal malignancies.

Authors:  Elizabeth C Smyth; Manish A Shah
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-12-14       Impact factor: 5.742

9.  Radiologist experience and CT examination quality determine metastasis detection in patients with esophageal or gastric cardia cancer.

Authors:  E P M van Vliet; J J Hermans; W De Wever; M J C Eijkemans; E W Steyerberg; C Faasse; E P M van Helmond; A M de Leeuw; A C Sikkenk; A R de Vries; E H de Vries; E J Kuipers; P D Siersema
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2008-06-04       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 10.  The role of FDG-PET and staging laparoscopy in the management of patients with cancer of the esophagus or gastroesophageal junction.

Authors:  Harry H Yoon; Val J Lowe; Stephen D Cassivi; Yvonne Romero
Journal:  Gastroenterol Clin North Am       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.806

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.