Literature DB >> 16910358

A prospective comparison of endorectal ultrasound and pelvic magnetic resonance in the preoperative staging of rectal cancer.

Paolo Bianchi1, Chiara Ceriani, Angela Palmisano, Giovanni Pompili, Giovanni Rubis Passoni, Matteo Rottoli, Andrea Cappellani, Marco Montorsi.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The development of new surgical modalities (local excision, coloanal-anastomosis) and the diffusion of preoperative neoadjuvant therapy, has increased the importance of an accurate preoperative staging in patients with rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the local preoperative staging of rectal carcinoma; moreover the two methods were assessed with a concordance K test.
METHODS: Twenty-nine patients with rectal carcinoma were staged with EUS and body coil MRI and then underwent radical surgery. The preoperative staging was compared with the histologic findings of the operative specimen.
RESULTS: EUS was more accurate (79.3%), with better sensibility (90%), positive predictive value (PPI9 (85.7%) and negative predictive value (NPV) (25%) than MRI in the evaluation of T parameter. MRI was more accurate (72.4%), with better specificity (81.2%), PPV (72.7%) and NPV (68.4%) than EUS in the evaluation of N parameter. The concordance test obtained a K value of 19.8% for the T parameter and 34.2% for the N parameter.
CONCLUSIONS: EUS and MRI are complementary methods in the preoperative staging of rectal cancer. EUS is more accurate in determining bowel wall penetration of the tumor, while MRI is more accurate in the evaluation of lymph node involvement. The low value of the K index confirms the complementarity of the two examinations. Further studies with new imaging techniques such as endocoil MRI, external phase-arrayed coil MRI and three dimensional ultrasound are needed to identify the most effective single examination in the preoperative staging of rectal cancer.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16910358

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Ital Chir        ISSN: 0003-469X            Impact factor:   0.766


  15 in total

Review 1.  Transanal endoscopic microsurgery for rectal tumors: a review.

Authors:  Hiroko Kunitake; Maher A Abbas
Journal:  Perm J       Date:  2012

2.  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

3.  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

4.  Stage and size using magnetic resonance imaging and endosonography in neoadjuvantly-treated rectal cancer.

Authors:  Torbjörn Swartling; Peter Kälebo; Kristoffer Derwinger; Bengt Gustavsson; Göran Kurlberg
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-06-07       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Preoperative staging of rectal carcinoma by endorectal ultrasound: is there a learning curve?

Authors:  S A Badger; P B Devlin; P J D Neilly; R Gilliland
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2007-02-09       Impact factor: 2.571

6.  Paradigm shift in the management of rectal cancer.

Authors:  Nihit Rawat; Martyn D Evans
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2014-05-18       Impact factor: 0.656

7.  MRI in T staging of rectal cancer: How effective is it?

Authors:  Mg Mulla; R Deb; R Singh
Journal:  Indian J Radiol Imaging       Date:  2010-05

8.  A simple scoring system based on clinical features to predict locally advanced rectal cancers.

Authors:  Guoxiang Cai; Ye Xu; Xiaoli Zhu; Junjie Peng; Zuofeng Li; Changchun Xiao; Xiang Du; Ji Zhu; Peng Lian; Weiqi Sheng; Zuqing Guan; Sanjun Cai
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2009-04-15       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 9.  [Impact of endoscopy and endosonography on local staging of rectal carcinoma].

Authors:  C Isbert; C-T Germer
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 0.955

10.  Surgical treatment for locally advanced lower third rectal cancer after neoadjuvent chemoradiation with capecitabine: prospective phase II trial.

Authors:  Mostafa Abd Elwanis; Doaa W Maximous; Mohamed Ibrahim Elsayed; Nabiel N H Mikhail
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2009-06-09       Impact factor: 2.754

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.