OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical value of double contrast-enhanced ultrasonography using oral and intravenous contrast agents in preoperative staging of gastric cancer. METHODS: Sixty-two patients with biopsy-proven gastric cancer were enrolled into this study, and were examined by double contrast-enhanced gastric ultrasonography preoperatively. The results were compared with postoperative pathologic findings. RESULTS: The accuracy of oral contrast-enhanced gastric ultrasonography and double contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in determining the T stage of gastric cancer was 72.9% (T1: 66.7%, T2: 60.0%, T3: 76.9%, T4: 71.4%) and 88.1% (T1: 66.7%, T2: 80.0%, T3: 89.7%, T4: 100%), respectively, with a statistically significant difference between the two methods (P = 0.036). The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and Youden index of oral contrast-enhanced gastric ultrasonography and double contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in assessment of lymph node metastasis were 74.5%, 66.7%, 72.9%, and 0.41 versus 89.4%, 75.0%, 86.4%, 0.76, respectively. No significant difference in the accuracy of assessment for lymph node metastasis was observed (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Double contrast-enhanced ultrasonography is useful for preoperative staging of gastric cancer, especially for T staging.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical value of double contrast-enhanced ultrasonography using oral and intravenous contrast agents in preoperative staging of gastric cancer. METHODS: Sixty-two patients with biopsy-proven gastric cancer were enrolled into this study, and were examined by double contrast-enhanced gastric ultrasonography preoperatively. The results were compared with postoperative pathologic findings. RESULTS: The accuracy of oral contrast-enhanced gastric ultrasonography and double contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in determining the T stage of gastric cancer was 72.9% (T1: 66.7%, T2: 60.0%, T3: 76.9%, T4: 71.4%) and 88.1% (T1: 66.7%, T2: 80.0%, T3: 89.7%, T4: 100%), respectively, with a statistically significant difference between the two methods (P = 0.036). The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy and Youden index of oral contrast-enhanced gastric ultrasonography and double contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in assessment of lymph node metastasis were 74.5%, 66.7%, 72.9%, and 0.41 versus 89.4%, 75.0%, 86.4%, 0.76, respectively. No significant difference in the accuracy of assessment for lymph node metastasis was observed (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Double contrast-enhanced ultrasonography is useful for preoperative staging of gastric cancer, especially for T staging.
Authors: Tao Yu; Xinling Wang; Zilong Zhao; Fan Liu; Xiaoting Liu; Yan Zhao; Yahong Luo Journal: World J Surg Oncol Date: 2015-05-19 Impact factor: 2.754