Literature DB >> 17321235

The role and clinical value of EUS in a multimodality esophageal carcinoma staging program with CT and positron emission tomography.

Patrick R Pfau1, Scott B Perlman, Peter Stanko, Terrence J Frick, Deepak V Gopal, Adnan Said, Zhengjun Zhang, Tracey Weigel.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: EUS, CT, and positron emission tomography (PET) have all been used in the preoperative staging of esophageal cancer separately or in various combinations.
OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to determine the value and role of EUS when used in conjunction with CT and PET imaging in staging cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction.
DESIGN: Retrospective single-center clinical trial.
SETTING: Academic tertiary care center. PATIENTS: Data were examined for 56 patients who concomitantly underwent examination with EUS, CT, and PET in a multimodality staging program. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: EUS, CT, and PET were examined for their ability to detect the primary tumor, local tumor stage, locoregional adenopathy, and distant metastases. With use of surgical resection as baseline therapy, the frequency at which EUS, CT, and PET affected and changed management was examined.
RESULTS: EUS is the only imaging test that identified all primary tumors and provided tumor staging. EUS identified a significantly greater number of patients (58.9%) with locoregional nodes than did CT (26.8%), P = .0006, or PET (37.5%), P = .02. CT identified 14.3% and PET identified 26.8% of patients with distant metastases. With CT alone, 15.2% of patients were not taken to surgery, whereas PET affected management by preventing surgery because of metastatic disease in 28.3% of patients. EUS changed management by guiding the need for neoadjuvant therapy in 34.8% of patients. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study, nonblinded study, lack of pathologic reference standard.
CONCLUSION: The primary strength of EUS in a multimodality staging strategy is in identifying patients with locally advanced disease and guiding the need for preoperative neoadjuvant therapy. EUS is not suited to determine resectability of esophageal cancer alone and thus is most effective when used in conjunction with other imaging tests such as CT and PET.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17321235     DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2006.12.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  28 in total

1.  The role of integrated F-18-FDG-PET scanning in the detection of M1 disease in oesophageal adenocarcinoma and impact on clinical management.

Authors:  Soumil Vyas; Sheraz R Markar; Lydia Iordanidou; Samantha Read; David Stoker; Majid Hashemi; Ian Mitchell; Mark Winslet; Jamshed Bomanji
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2011-10-01       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 2.  Accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound in the diagnosis of distal and celiac axis lymph node metastasis in esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Srinivas R Puli; Jyotsna B K Reddy; Matthew L Bechtold; Mainor R Antillon; Jamal A Ibdah
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2007-12-20       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 3.  Staging accuracy of esophageal cancer by endoscopic ultrasound: a meta-analysis and systematic review.

Authors:  Srinivas-R Puli; Jyotsna-Bk Reddy; Matthew-L Bechtold; Daphne Antillon; Jamal-A Ibdah; Mainor-R Antillon
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-03-14       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Oesophageal cancer: can imaging improve its assessment?

Authors:  Giovanni Lucignani
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 9.236

5.  Comparison of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), positron emission tomography (PET), and computed tomography (CT) in the preoperative locoregional staging of resectable esophageal cancer.

Authors:  Jeongmin Choi; Sang Gyun Kim; Joo Sung Kim; Hyun Chae Jung; In Sung Song
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-12-24       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Update: modern approaches to the treatment of localized esophageal cancer.

Authors:  James Welsh; Arya Amini; Anna Likhacheva; Jeremy Erasmus J; Daniel Gomez; Marta Davila; Reza J Mehran; Ritsuko Komaki; Zhongxing Liao; Wayne L Hofstetter; Jeffrey Lee H; Manoop S Bhutani; Jaffer A Ajani
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 5.075

7.  Comparison between free-breathing radial VIBE on 3-T MRI and endoscopic ultrasound for preoperative T staging of resectable oesophageal cancer, with histopathological correlation.

Authors:  Jinrong Qu; Hongkai Zhang; Zhaoqi Wang; Fengguang Zhang; Hui Liu; Zhidan Ding; Yin Li; Jie Ma; Zhongxian Zhang; Shouning Zhang; Yafeng Dong; Lina Jiang; Wei Zhang; Robert Grimm; Berthold Kiefer; Ihab R Kamel; Jianjun Qin; Hailiang Li
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-08-10       Impact factor: 5.315

8.  Clinical T2N0M0 carcinoma of thoracic esophagus.

Authors:  Timothy D Wagner; Nikhil Khushalani; Gary Y Yang
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 9.  [Importance of PET in surgery of esophageal cancer].

Authors:  K Ott; T Schmidt; F Lordick; K Herrmann
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 0.955

10.  Role of F18-FDG PET/CT in the Staging and Restaging of Esophageal Cancer: A Comparison with CECT.

Authors:  Praveen Kumar; Nishikant A Damle; Chandrasekhar Bal
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2012-02-18
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.