Literature DB >> 17674104

Limitations of early rectal cancer nodal staging may explain failure after local excision.

Ron G Landmann1, W Douglas Wong, Joseph Hoepfl, Jinru Shia, José G Guillem, Larissa K Temple, Philip B Paty, Martin R Weiser.   

Abstract

Successful selection of patients with rectal cancer for local excision requires accurate preoperative lymph node staging. Although endorectal ultrasound is capable of detecting locally advanced disease, its ability to correctly identify nodal metastases in early rectal lesions is less well described. This study examines the accuracy of endorectal ultrasound in determining nodal stage based on depth of penetration of the primary lesion (T stage). Between 1998 and 2003, endorectal ultrasound was performed on 938 consecutive patients; 134 had biopsy-proven rectal cancers and were treated with radical resection, without neoadjuvant therapy. Lymph node metastases were measured pathologically and correlated with endorectal ultrasound and clinicopathologic features. Accuracy and specificity of endorectal ultrasound nodal staging was determined. The overall accuracy of endorectal ultrasound nodal staging for the study cohort was 70 percent, with a 16 percent false-positive rate and 14 percent false-negative rate. Endorectal ultrasound was more likely to overlook small metastatic lymph node deposits. The size of lymph node metastasis and accuracy of endorectal ultrasound nodal staging was related to T stage. The specificity of endorectal ultrasound nodal staging, or the ability to identify patients who were node-negative, was dependent on T stage. Early rectal lesions are more likely to have lymph node micrometastases not detected by endorectal ultrasound. The ability of endorectal ultrasound to correctly identify patients without lymph node metastasis is dependent on the T stage of the primary lesion. The limitations of endorectal ultrasound in accurately staging nodal disease in early rectal lesions may, in part, explain the relatively high recurrence rates seen after local excision.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17674104     DOI: 10.1007/s10350-007-9019-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum        ISSN: 0012-3706            Impact factor:   4.585


  22 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

Review 2.  Local Excision and Endoscopic Resections for Early Rectal Cancer.

Authors:  Guilherme Pagin São Julião; Juan Pablo Celentano; Flavia Andrea Alexandre; Bruna Borba Vailati
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2017-11-27

3.  The Role of Transanal Surgery in the Management of T1 Rectal Cancers.

Authors:  Imran Hassan; Paul E Wise; David A Margolin; James W Fleshman
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2015-06-06       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 4.  Role of endoscopic ultrasonography in the loco-regional staging of patients with rectal cancer.

Authors:  Pietro Marone; Mario de Bellis; Valentina D'Angelo; Paolo Delrio; Valentina Passananti; Elena Di Girolamo; Giovanni Battista Rossi; Daniela Rega; Maura Claire Tracey; Alfonso Mario Tempesta
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2015-06-25

5.  A novel preoperative risk score to predict lymph node positivity for rectal neuroendocrine tumors: An NCDB analysis to guide operative technique.

Authors:  Adriana C Gamboa; Yuan Liu; Rachel M Lee; Mohammad Y Zaidi; Charles A Staley; Maria C Russell; Kenneth Cardona; Patrick S Sullivan; Shishir K Maithel
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2019-08-26       Impact factor: 3.454

Review 6.  Beyond Histologic Staging: Emerging Imaging Strategies in Colorectal Cancer with Special Focus on Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Authors:  Tyler J Fraum; Joseph W Owen; Kathryn J Fowler
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2016-09

7.  Role of tumor size in the pre-operative management of rectal cancer patients.

Authors:  Inti Zlobec; Parham Minoo; Eva Karamitopoulou; George Peros; Efstratios S Patsouris; Frank Lehmann; Alessandro Lugli
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-06-15       Impact factor: 3.067

8.  Local Excision vs. Radical Resection in T1-2 Rectal Carcinoma: Results of a Study From the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Registry Data.

Authors:  L J Hazard; D C Shrieve; B Sklow; L Pappas; K M Boucher
Journal:  Gastrointest Cancer Res       Date:  2009-05

9.  The concurrence of histologically positive resection margins and sessile morphology is an important risk factor for lymph node metastasis after complete endoscopic removal of malignant colorectal polyps.

Authors:  Lars Boenicke; Martin Fein; Marco Sailer; Christoph Isbert; Christoph-Tomas Germer; Andreas Thalheimer
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2009-11-06       Impact factor: 2.571

10.  Recurrences after local excision for early rectal adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Jung Wook Huh; Yoon Ah Park; Kang Young Lee; Seong Ah Kim; Seung-Kook Sohn
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2009-10-21       Impact factor: 2.759

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.