AIMS: To provide evidence-based practice guideline recommendations on the use of fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) for diagnosis, staging, assessing treatment response, liver metastasis and restaging or recurrence of oesophageal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review by Facey et al. (Health Technology Assessment 2007;11(44):iii-iv, xi-267) was used as the evidence base for recommendation development. As the review was limited to August 2005, the evidence base was updated to May 2010 using the same search strategies for MEDLINE and EMBASE used in the original review. The authors of the current systematic review drafted recommendations, which were reviewed, adapted and accepted by consensus by the Ontario provincial Gastrointestinal Disease Site Group and a special meeting of clinical experts. RESULTS: The results from the Facey et al. review for oesophageal cancer included four other systematic reviews and six primary studies. The 2005 to 2010 updated search included two additional systematic reviews and 29 primary studies. Recommendations were developed based on this evidence and accepted by consensus. CONCLUSIONS: PET is recommended to improve the accuracy of M staging for the staging work-up of patients with oesophageal cancer who are potential candidates for curative therapy. Due to insufficient evidence, no recommendation was made for or against the use of PET for the assessment of treatment response and the evaluation of suspected recurrence.
AIMS: To provide evidence-based practice guideline recommendations on the use of fluoro-2-deoxy-d-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) for diagnosis, staging, assessing treatment response, liver metastasis and restaging or recurrence of oesophageal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review by Facey et al. (Health Technology Assessment 2007;11(44):iii-iv, xi-267) was used as the evidence base for recommendation development. As the review was limited to August 2005, the evidence base was updated to May 2010 using the same search strategies for MEDLINE and EMBASE used in the original review. The authors of the current systematic review drafted recommendations, which were reviewed, adapted and accepted by consensus by the Ontario provincial Gastrointestinal Disease Site Group and a special meeting of clinical experts. RESULTS: The results from the Facey et al. review for oesophageal cancer included four other systematic reviews and six primary studies. The 2005 to 2010 updated search included two additional systematic reviews and 29 primary studies. Recommendations were developed based on this evidence and accepted by consensus. CONCLUSIONS: PET is recommended to improve the accuracy of M staging for the staging work-up of patients with oesophageal cancer who are potential candidates for curative therapy. Due to insufficient evidence, no recommendation was made for or against the use of PET for the assessment of treatment response and the evaluation of suspected recurrence.
Authors: Mariaelena Occhipinti; Benedikt H Heidinger; Elisa Franquet; Ronald L Eisenberg; Alexander A Bankier Journal: Diagn Interv Radiol Date: 2015 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.630
Authors: Lucas Goense; Alicia S Borggreve; Sophie E Heethuis; Astrid Lhmw van Lier; Richard van Hillegersberg; Stella Mook; Gert J Meijer; Peter S N van Rossum; Jelle P Ruurda Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2018-03-14 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Lawrence R Kleinberg; Paul J Catalano; Arlene A Forastiere; Steven M Keller; Edith P Mitchel; Pramila Rani Anne; Al B Benson Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-12-18 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Maarten C J Anderegg; Elisabeth J de Groof; Suzanne S Gisbertz; Roel J Bennink; Sjoerd M Lagarde; Jean H G Klinkenbijl; Marcel G W Dijkgraaf; Jacques J G H M Bergman; Maarten C C M Hulshof; Hanneke W M van Laarhoven; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-11-03 Impact factor: 3.240