Literature DB >> 15114028

Radial endoscopic ultrasound and spiral computed tomography in the diagnosis and staging of periampullary tumors.

F Maluf-Filho1, P Sakai, J E M Cunha, T Garrido, M Rocha, M C C Machado, S Ishioka.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The early detection and accurate staging of pancreatic and ampullary cancer is of utmost importance for the achievement of surgical radical treatment. The aim of this study was to assess prospectively the role of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in detection and staging of pancreatic and ampullary cancer, comparing its results to those obtained with spiral computed tomography (SCT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-one patients with suspected pancreatic and ampullary tumors were included, 46 (75, 4%) of whom presented with obstructive jaundice. Patients underwent EUS and SCT within a 7-day period. Examiners were unaware of the previous imaging results, except conventional echography. Image interpretation was compared to surgical and histopathological findings.
RESULTS: Fifty-six (91, 8%) patients were surgically explored. Clinical follow-up and/or tissue diagnosis determined the correct diagnosis in the remaining five patients. Pancreatic cancer and ampullary cancer were observed in 29 (47, 6%) and 10 (16, 4%) patients, respectively. Chronic pancreatitis and choledocholithiasis were the most common diagnosis in patients with non-neoplastic disease. EUS was more effective than SCT for the definition of the final diagnosis in patients with obstructive jaundice (87.0 vs. 67.4%, p = 0.04). Both exams were equally effective for detecting pancreatic cancer but EUS predicted more accurately the involvement of portal-mesenteric axis by the tumor (87.0 vs. 67.4%, p = 0.04). EUS was particularly useful in the diagnosis of cancer of papilla of Vater.
CONCLUSION: In patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma without unequivocal signs of distant metastatic disease, EUS is more accurate than SCT to predict venous involvement by the tumor. EUS is superior to SCT to detect ampullary adenocarcinoma. Both methods are equally ineffective to detect nodal involvement in pancreatic and ampullary cancer. Copyright 2004 S. Karger AG, Basel and IAP

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15114028     DOI: 10.1159/000078150

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pancreatology        ISSN: 1424-3903            Impact factor:   3.996


  6 in total

Review 1.  Diagnostic accuracy of different imaging modalities following computed tomography (CT) scanning for assessing the resectability with curative intent in pancreatic and periampullary cancer.

Authors:  Domenico Tamburrino; Deniece Riviere; Mohammad Yaghoobi; Brian R Davidson; Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-09-15

2.  The diagnostic accuracy and strength of agreement between endoscopic ultrasound and histopathology in the staging of ampullary tumors.

Authors:  Eric Wee; Sandeep Lakhtakia; Rajesh Gupta; Sekaran Anuradha; Mahesh Shetty; Rakesh Kalapala; Amitabh Monga; Arjunan Saravanan; Pradeep Rebala; Mohan Ramchandani; Guduru Venkat Rao; Duvvuru Nageshwar Reddy
Journal:  Indian J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-09-21

3.  Endoscopic ultrasound in the papilla and the periampullary region.

Authors:  Cecilia Castillo
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2010-08-16

Review 4.  Review of the investigation and surgical management of resectable ampullary adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  James Askew; Saxon Connor
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2013-01-10       Impact factor: 3.647

5.  Nonoperative imaging techniques in suspected biliary tract obstruction.

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

6.  Long-term prognosis of surgical treatment for early ampullary cancers and implications for local ampullectomy.

Authors:  Junmin Song; Hongxiang Liu; Zhen Li; Chao Yang; Yuling Sun; Chaojie Wang
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2015-03-22       Impact factor: 2.102

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.