BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is the most accurate method of assessing the locoregional extent of cancer of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of tumor-related factors such as length and location on the accuracy of EUS in staging these tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 1997 and September 2002, 280 consecutive patients underwent preoperative EUS for staging cancer of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction. The influence of histopathology, the presence of Barrett's dysplasia or stenosis, and the location and length of the primary tumor on the accuracy of EUS for T, N, and M staging were studied. RESULTS: The overall accuracy rates of EUS for assessing the T, N, and M stages were 73 %, 80 %, and 78 %, respectively. The influence of the tumor's histopathology and the presence of Barrett's dysplasia or stenosis was minimal. The accuracy of EUS was greater in tumors 5 cm or less in size than in tumors larger than 5 cm (82 % vs. 52 % for the T stage, P < 0.05; 88 % vs. 59 % for the N stage, P < 0.05; and 92 % vs. 56 % for the M stage, P < 0.001). The low accuracy of T staging in larger tumors may be due to the exclusion of patients with local unresectability or distant metastases. EUS was also significantly better in esophageal tumors, particularly for identifying celiac trunk metastases (93 % vs. 63 %; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of EUS for staging esophageal cancer is lower in tumors larger than 5 cm and in esophagogastric junction tumors than in tumors 5 cm in size or less and in esophageal tumors. These findings should be considered when treatment decisions are being taken.
BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is the most accurate method of assessing the locoregional extent of cancer of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of tumor-related factors such as length and location on the accuracy of EUS in staging these tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 1997 and September 2002, 280 consecutive patients underwent preoperative EUS for staging cancer of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction. The influence of histopathology, the presence of Barrett's dysplasia or stenosis, and the location and length of the primary tumor on the accuracy of EUS for T, N, and M staging were studied. RESULTS: The overall accuracy rates of EUS for assessing the T, N, and M stages were 73 %, 80 %, and 78 %, respectively. The influence of the tumor's histopathology and the presence of Barrett's dysplasia or stenosis was minimal. The accuracy of EUS was greater in tumors 5 cm or less in size than in tumors larger than 5 cm (82 % vs. 52 % for the T stage, P < 0.05; 88 % vs. 59 % for the N stage, P < 0.05; and 92 % vs. 56 % for the M stage, P < 0.001). The low accuracy of T staging in larger tumors may be due to the exclusion of patients with local unresectability or distant metastases. EUS was also significantly better in esophageal tumors, particularly for identifying celiac trunk metastases (93 % vs. 63 %; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of EUS for staging esophageal cancer is lower in tumors larger than 5 cm and in esophagogastric junction tumors than in tumors 5 cm in size or less and in esophageal tumors. These findings should be considered when treatment decisions are being taken.
Authors: Brechtje A Grotenhuis; Bas P L Wijnhoven; Jan Werner Poley; John J Hermans; Katharina Biermann; Manon C W Spaander; Marco J Bruno; Hugo W Tilanus; J Jan B van Lanschot Journal: World J Surg Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: A Gines; S D Cassivi; J A Martenson; C Schleck; C Deschamps; F A Sinicrope; S R Alberts; J A Murray; Alan R Zinsmeister; Enrique Vazquez-Sequeiros; F C Nichols; R C Miller; J F Quevedo; M S Allen; J A Alexander; T Zais; M G Haddock; Y Romero Journal: Dis Esophagus Date: 2008 Impact factor: 3.429
Authors: Traves D Crabtree; Andrzej S Kosinski; Varun Puri; William Burfeind; Ankit Bharat; G Alexander Patterson; Wayne Hofstetter; Bryan F Meyers Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2013-05-31 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: J B Hulshoff; V E M Mul; H E M de Boer; W Noordzij; T Korteweg; H M van Dullemen; W B Nagengast; V Oppedijk; J P E N Pierie; John Th M Plukker Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2017-03-16 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Bareld B Pultrum; Judith Honing; Justin K Smit; Hendrik M van Dullemen; Gooitzen M van Dam; Henk Groen; Harry Hollema; John Th M Plukker Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 5.344