Literature DB >> 16520014

Feasibility and accuracy of TRUS in the pre-treatment staging for rectal carcinoma in general practice.

H Ptok1, F Marusch, F Meyer, P Wendling, H J C Wenisch, W Sendt, T Manger, H Lippert, I Gastinger.   

Abstract

AIMS: Transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) is the diagnostic tool of choice for local staging of rectal carcinoma. The accuracy in determining of tumour infiltration depth has been reported to reach 95% (on average, 85%). The aim of the study was to analyse the diagnostic accuracy of the TRUS in the clinical routine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From 01/01/2000 to 12/31/2003, all patients with rectal carcinoma were enrolled in a prospective multicenter observational study. In case of complete findings of pre-operative TRUS and post-operative histological investigation of the surgical specimen on the tumour infiltration depth, overall accuracy of TRUS was determined.
RESULTS: Overall, 13,610 patients with rectal carcinoma were enrolled in the study. Five thousand and fifty-six subjects (37%) underwent TRUS. In 3,501 patients, TRUS finding (uT-stage) could be compared with the result of the definitive histologic investigation (pT-stage). The accuracy of TRUS in all T-stages was 65.8%. The highest sensitivity was achieved in the T3-stage (74.9%), while in T2, T1, and T4, it was 59.6, 59.0 and 31.1%, respectively. In discriminating tumour growth limited to the rectal wall vs that through the rectal wall into the neighboring tissue, TRUS-associated accuracy was 76.5%. There were no differences between various tumour locations above the anocutaneous line.
CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic accuracy of TRUS in determining depth of tumour infiltration within or through the rectum wall in the routinuous diagnostic of rectal carcinoma does not reach the excellent published study results. A considerable improvement of the qualitative outcome in using this specific diagnostic tool appears to be recommendable to utilize its advantages such as high accuracy, efficacy, and practicability in the diagnostic process and deriving consequences for a possible neoadjuvant treatment as well as optimal planning of the surgical approach.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16520014     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2006.01.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol        ISSN: 0748-7983            Impact factor:   4.424


  13 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.  Is magnetic resonance imaging useful for the management of patients with rectal villous adenoma? A study of 45 consecutive patients treated by transanal endoscopic microsurgery.

Authors:  Lucas Raynaud; Diane Mege; Magaly Zappa; Nathalie Guedj; Valérie Vilgrain; Yves Panis
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2018-08-22       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Local management of rectal neoplasia.

Authors:  John Touzios; Kirk A Ludwig
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2008-11

4.  Rectal cancer staging.

Authors:  James S Wu
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2007-08

Review 5.  [Local diagnostics for rectal cancer. What is realistic?].

Authors:  H Ptok; I Gastinger; H Lippert
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 0.955

6.  Early rectal cancer: the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) clinical consensus conference.

Authors:  Mario Morino; Mauro Risio; Simon Bach; Regina Beets-Tan; Krzysztof Bujko; Yves Panis; Philip Quirke; Bjorn Rembacken; Eric Rullier; Yutaka Saito; Tonia Young-Fadok; Marco Ettore Allaix
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-01-22       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  T-staging of rectal cancer: accuracy of 3.0 Tesla MRI compared with 1.5 Tesla.

Authors:  Monique Maas; Doenja M J Lambregts; Max J Lahaye; Geerard L Beets; Walter Backes; Roy F A Vliegen; Margreet Osinga-de Jong; Joachim E Wildberger; Regina G H Beets-Tan
Journal:  Abdom Imaging       Date:  2012-06

Review 8.  Future directions for monitoring treatment response in colorectal cancer.

Authors:  Avery S Walker; Nathan P Zwintscher; Eric K Johnson; Justin A Maykel; Alexander Stojadinovic; Aviram Nissan; Itzhak Avital; Björn Ldm Brücher; Scott R Steele
Journal:  J Cancer       Date:  2014-01-05       Impact factor: 4.207

9.  Clinicopathologic Comparison of High-Dose-Rate Endorectal Brachytherapy versus Conventional Chemoradiotherapy in the Neoadjuvant Setting for Resectable Stages II and III Low Rectal Cancer.

Authors:  Jessica A Smith; Aaron T Wild; Aatur Singhi; Siva P Raman; Haoming Qiu; Rachit Kumar; Amy Hacker-Prietz; Ralph H Hruban; Ihab R Kamel; Jonathan Efron; Elizabeth C Wick; Nilofer S Azad; Luis A Diaz; Yi Le; Elwood P Armour; Susan L Gearhart; Joseph M Herman
Journal:  Int J Surg Oncol       Date:  2012-07-08

Review 10.  Optimal imaging staging of rectal cancer.

Authors:  Doenja M J Lambregts; Regina G H Beets-Tan
Journal:  EJC Suppl       Date:  2013-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.