| Literature DB >> 18533990 |
David Melodelima1, Frederic Prat, Jacques Fritsch, Yves Theillere, Dominique Cathignol.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Esophageal tumors generally bear a poor prognosis. Radical surgery is generally the only curative method available but is not feasible in the majority of patients; palliative therapy with stent placement is generally performed. It has been demonstrated that High Intensity Ultrasound can induce rapid, complete and well-defined coagulation necrosis. Thus, for the treatment of esophageal tumors, we have designed an ultrasound applicator that uses an intraluminal approach to fill up this therapeutic gap.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2008 PMID: 18533990 PMCID: PMC2430546 DOI: 10.1186/1479-5876-6-28
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Transl Med ISSN: 1479-5876 Impact factor: 5.531
Figure 1Intraluminal ultrasound applicator. (a) Schematic diagram of the applicator. (b) US device for the treatment of esophageal tumors.
Figure 2Head of the intraluminal high intensity ultrasound applicator. The ultrasound imaging probe is in front of the therapeutic transducer to image the region of interest.
Figure 3Gross positioning of the therapeutic ultrasound applicator. The therapeutic ultrasound applicator was placed in the esophagus under fluoroscopy after positioning metallic clips on the patient's skin.
Figure 4Sonogram of an esophageal tumor obtained during treatment.
Characteristics of individual patients.
| No. | Gender | Age | Tumor type | TNM stage | Stricture C/L/T | Number of US sessions | Other treatments | Dysphagia Improvement | M1 status | M3 status | Survival |
| 1 | M | 80 | SCC | T3N1M0 | 360°/30/6 180°/15/6 | 1 | 5FU/CDDP | 5 > 1 | PR Clin: good Obstructive nodule Stent require | No tumor progression Clin: good No dysphagia | >4 mo |
| 2 | M | 55 | SCC | T1N0 | 110°/10/7 360°/9/9 | 3 | 5FU/CDDP | 3 > 0 | CR, proximal tumorPR, distal tumorClin: goodNo dysphagia | PRClin: poor, deteriorating general conditionRecurrent dysphagia | 6 mo |
| 3 | M | 83 | AC | T3N2M1 | 360°/30/12 | 1 | 5FU | 5 > 2 | 3 wk | ||
| 4 | F | 86 | SCC | T3NxM0 | 360°/20/7–12 | 1 | 5 > 2 | PRClin: poorWeight loss (2 kg) | 3 mo | ||
SCC, squamous cell carcinoma; AC, adenocarcinoma; TNM, tumor, node, metastasis; C/L/T, circumference/length/thickness of tumor (mm); 5FU, fluorouracil; CDDP, cisplatinum; M1, M3, 1 and 3 months after treatment; clin, clinical status; PR, partial response; CR, complete response; US, ultrasound.
Summary of treatment results
| 1 week | 1 month | 3 months | ||
| Patient 1 | Biopsies | Positive in obstructive nodule | Positive in obstructive nodule | Positive in obstructive nodule |
| Stricture reduction | Obstruction: 10% | Obstructive nodule at the upper part of the tumor | Obstructive nodule at the upper part of the tumor | |
| Endoscopic aspect | Necrosis on the whole length of the tumor | Necrosis on 75% of the tumor | No tumor progression | |
| Patient 2 After the 3rd session of ultrasound | Biopsies | Positive in non necrotic areas | Positive in non necrotic areas | Not done |
| Stricture reduction | No obstruction | No obstruction | ||
| Endoscopic aspect | Proximal tumor: Complete necrosisDistal tumor: 90% necrosed | Proximal tumor: No stenosis, complete necrosisDistal tumor: Infiltrating non-stenotic aspect | ||
| Patient 3 | Biopsies | Control endoscopy was contra-indicatedNo dysphagia | ||
| Stricture reduction | ||||
| Endoscopic aspect | ||||
| Patient 4 | Biopsies | Not documented | Not documented | Negative |
| Stricture reduction | Obstruction: 90% → 50% | Obstruction: 50% | Obstruction: 50% → 70% | |
| Endoscopic aspect | Large necrotic area on the whole length of the tumor | Large necrotic area on the whole length of the tumor | Large necrotic area on the whole length of the tumor | |
Figure 5Patient 1. Tumor necrosis was observed on the whole length of the tumor, except at the proximal part where necrosis appeared to be incomplete. (a) Control endoscopy 8 days after the treatment. The necrosis was pushed distally with the endoscope. T, remaining tumor. N, Tumor necrosis. (b) EUS examination 8 days after the treatment.
Figure 6Patient 2. Control endoscopy of the esophageal tumor. (a) before and (b) 10 days after the treatment.