Literature DB >> 9378384

Spiral computed tomography and operative staging of gastric carcinoma: a comparison with histopathological staging.

J Davies1, A G Chalmers, H M Sue-Ling, J May, G V Miller, I G Martin, D Johnston.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Much controversy exists as to the value of computed tomography (CT) in the preoperative staging of gastric cancer, because of its limited ability to identify correctly lymph node (LN) metastases, invasion of adjacent organs, or hepatic and peritoneal metastases. Spiral CT scanners have a number of potential advantages over conventional scanners, including the absence of respiratory misregistration, image reconstruction smaller than scan collimation permitting overlapping slices and optimisation of intravenous contrast enhancement. AIM: To compare the performance of spiral CT and operative assessment against formal (TNM) pathological staging. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A study of 105 consecutive patients who underwent both spiral CT and operative staging was performed. All CT scans were reviewed by a radiologist who commented on tumour location and size, evidence of adjacent organ invasion, lymph node metastases to both N1 and N2 nodes, and evidence of hepatic and peritoneal metastases. All patients underwent careful operative assessment at the time of surgery, along the lines suggested by Rohde and colleagues.
RESULTS: Spiral CT remained poor at identifying LN metastases to both N1 and N2 lymph nodes, with sensitivity ranging from 24 to 43%; specificity, however, was 100%. Operative staging was superior, with sensitivities between 84 and 94%, but specificity was much lower (63-74%). Spiral CT correctly detected 13 of 17 cases of invasion of either the colon or the mesocolon (sensitivity 76%) compared with 16 of 17 cases at operative staging (sensitivity 94%). Spiral CT correctly identified three of six cases with invasion of the pancreas (sensitivity 50%) compared with six of six cases on operative staging (sensitivity 100%). Spiral CT correctly identified 12 of 17 cases of peritoneal metastases (sensitivity 71%) and four of seven cases of hepatic metastases (sensitivity 57%).
CONCLUSION: Whilst spiral CT remains poor at identifying lymph node metastases, it correctly identified most cases with invasion of either the colon or the mesocolon and half the cases of pancreatic invasion. It was of value in detecting peritoneal metastases and some cases with hepatic metastases. At present, at Leeds General Infirmary spiral CT is performed routinely on all patients with gastric cancer and a selective staging laparoscopy policy is adopted in those patients in whom the status of the peritoneal cavity and liver is in doubt.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9378384      PMCID: PMC1891482          DOI: 10.1136/gut.41.3.314

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gut        ISSN: 0017-5749            Impact factor:   23.059


  31 in total

1.  Computed tomography in the preoperative evaluation of gastric carcinoma.

Authors:  U Kleinhaus; D Militianu
Journal:  Gastrointest Radiol       Date:  1988

2.  Esophagogastric carcinoma: preoperative TNM classification with endosonography.

Authors:  T L Tio; P P Coene; M H Schouwink; G N Tytgat
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1989-11       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  CT in advanced gastric carcinoma: is exploratory laparotomy avoidable?

Authors:  J Triller; R Roder; A Stafford; R Schröder
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  1986-08       Impact factor: 3.528

4.  Computed tomography in gastric cancer.

Authors:  I Fraser; R Nash; D C James
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1985-03       Impact factor: 6.939

5.  Gastric adenocarcinoma: CT versus surgical staging.

Authors:  S K Sussman; R A Halvorsen; F F Illescas; R H Cohan; M Saeed; P M Silverman; W M Thompson; W C Meyers
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1988-05       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Laparoscopy, ultrasound and computed tomography in cancer of the oesophagus and gastric cardia: a prospective comparison for detecting intra-abdominal metastases.

Authors:  I Watt; I Stewart; D Anderson; G Bell; J R Anderson
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1989-10       Impact factor: 6.939

7.  Gastric cancer: a 25-year review.

Authors:  W H Allum; D J Powell; C C McConkey; J W Fielding
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 6.939

8.  Surgical staging of gastric carcinoma: sources and consequences of error.

Authors:  M V Madden; S K Price; G M Learmonth; D M Dent
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1987-02       Impact factor: 6.939

9.  Evaluation of gastric adenocarcinoma. Abdominal computed tomography does not replace celiotomy.

Authors:  A O Cook; B A Levine; K R Sirinek; H V Gaskill
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  1986-05

10.  Gastric adenocarcinoma: a comparison of the accuracy and economics of staging by computed tomography and surgery.

Authors:  A A Moss; P Schnyder; W Marks; A R Margulis
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  1981-01       Impact factor: 22.682

View more
  24 in total

1.  Guidelines for the management of oesophageal and gastric cancer.

Authors:  W H Allum; S M Griffin; A Watson; D Colin-Jones
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 23.059

2.  Evaluation of contrast-enhanced helical hydro-CT in staging gastric cancer.

Authors:  Wen-Zhou Wei; Jie-Ping Yu; Jun Li; Chang-Sheng Liu; Xiao-Hua Zheng
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2005-08-07       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 3.  Current role of surgical therapy in gastric cancer.

Authors:  Ryan Swan; Thomas J Miner
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2006-01-21       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Lymph node metastasis in patients with gastric cancer: a multi-modality, morphologic and functional imaging study.

Authors:  Jinman Zhong; Weiwei Zhao; Fang Ren; Shun Qi; Xifu Wang; Tianchu Lv; Zhanliang Su; Hong Yin; Jing Ren; Yi Huan
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2016-12-15       Impact factor: 4.060

5.  Type IV collagen levels are elevated in the serum of patients with peritoneal dissemination of gastric cancer.

Authors:  Jun Kinoshita; Sachio Fushida; Shinichi Harada; Isamu Makino; Keishi Nakamura; Katsunobu Oyama; Hideto Fujita; Itasu Ninomiya; Takashi Fujimura; Masato Kayahara; Tetsuo Ohta
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2010-09-23       Impact factor: 2.967

Review 6.  Present state of the Mini-Invasive Surgery (MIS) in esophageal and gastric cancer.

Authors:  J S Azagra; M Goergen; V Lens; J F Ibáñez-Aguirre; M Schiltz; I Siciliano
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 3.405

7.  Optimizing of preoperative computed tomography for diagnosis in patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis.

Authors:  Carolin D Duhr; Werner Kenn; Ralph Kickuth; Alexander G Kerscher; Christoph-Thomas Germer; Dietbert Hahn; Joerg O W Pelz
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2011-12-21       Impact factor: 2.754

8.  Evaluation of lymph node metastasis in patients with gastric cancer: a comparison of the directionality of lymph node metastasis and the total number of metastatic lymph nodes.

Authors:  Maki Kitagawa; Daisuke Ichikawa; Shuhei Komatsu; Kazuma Okamoto; Atsushi Shiozaki; Hitoshi Fujiwara; Yasutoshi Murayama; Yoshiaki Kuriu; Hisashi Ikoma; Masayoshi Nakanishi; Toshiya Ochiai; Yukihito Kokuba; Teruhisa Sonoyama; Eigo Otsuji
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2012-12-12       Impact factor: 2.549

9.  Computed tomographic characteristics for patients with unresectable gastric cancer harboring low-volume peritoneal carcinomatosis.

Authors:  Jhe-Cyuan Guo; Chin-Chen Chang; Chung-Yi Yang; Bin-Chi Liao; Jau-Yu Liau; Chin-Hao Chang; Kun-Huei Yeh
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2017-07-19       Impact factor: 3.064

10.  Gastric Adenocarcinoma: Is Computed Tomography (CT) Useful in Preoperative Staging?

Authors:  Esther Uña Cidón; Isabel Jiménez Cuenca
Journal:  Clin Med Oncol       Date:  2009-08-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.