Staging accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound based on pathologic analysis after minimally invasive esophagectomy

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is a common staging modality used in patients with esophageal cancer. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the accuracy and sensitivity of EUS in determining the depth of penetration (T stage) and nodal status (N stage) in patients with esophageal cancer who underwent minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). A retrospective analysis of all patients at a university hospital who underwent preoperative EUS followed by MIE for cancer was performed. We compared the results of preoperative EUS to final pathologic analyses of the esophageal specimen, examining the accuracy of EUS staging. Ninety-five patients with esophageal cancer who underwent MIE had preoperative EUS. Twenty-four of the 95 patients were excluded for lack of a repeat EUS after neoadjuvant therapy before resection. Hence, 71 patients were evaluated for the accuracy of EUS staging. The accuracy of EUS for T0 disease was 80 per cent; T1 disease was 75 per cent; T2 disease was 39 per cent; and T3 disease was 88 per cent. The overall EUS accuracy for T stage was 72 per cent with overstaging occurring mostly for pathologic T1 tumors in 18 per cent and understaging occurring mostly for pathologic T3 tumors in 11 per cent. The sensitivity and specificity for detection of nodal involvement were 79 per cent and 74 per cent, respectively. However the accuracy for T and N staging by EUS after neoadjuvant therapy decreased to 63 per cent and 38 per cent, respectively. Endoscopic ultrasound in the absence of neoadjuvant therapy is a relatively accurate and sensitive modality for determining the depth of tumor penetration and the presence of nodal disease in patients with esophageal carcinoma. The accuracy for T and N staging is less reliable after neoadjuvant therapy.     

Endoscopic ultrasound for preoperative staging of esophageal carcinoma

Background Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is potentially the best method for pretreatment staging of esophageal carcinoma once distant metastases have been excluded by other methods. However, its apparent accuracy might be influenced by the use of neoadjuvant therapy. To determine the accuracy of EUS in patients undergoing esophageal resection, the authors reviewed their experience with EUS. Methods A total of 73 patients with esophageal carcinoma who underwent an esophagectomy between April 2000 and February 2005 were examined using preoperative EUS and computed tomography (CT). Of these patients, 39 also underwent preoperative neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Both EUS and CT scan were used to determine the depth of tumor penetration (T-stage) and the presence of lymph node metastases (N-stage). These results then were compared with staging determined after pathologic examination of the resected surgical specimen. Results For patients not undergoing neoadjuvant therapy, T-stage was accurately determined by EUS in 79%, N-stage in 74%, and tumor node metastasis (TNM) classification in 65% of the cases. However, when patients who had undergone neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were included, the overall accuracy of EUS was 64% for T-stage, 63% for N-stage, and 53% for TNM classification. For the patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy, EUS indicated a more advanced T-stage in 49%, N-stage in 38%, and TNM classification in 51% of the cases, as compared with pathology. The overall accuracy of EUS for T- and N-stage carcinomas was superior to that of CT scanning. Conclusion For patients who do not undergo preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy, EUS is a more accurate method for determining T- and N-stage resected esophageal carcinomas. Neoadjuvant therapy, however, results in apparent overstaging, predominantly because of tumor downstaging, and this reduces the apparent accuracy of EUS (and CT scanning) in this patient group. Nevertheless, EUS staging before neoadjuvant therapy could be more accurate than pathologic staging after treatment, thereby providing better initial staging information, which can be used to facilitate treatment.     

Does neoadjuvant chemoradiation downstage esophageal carcinoma?

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is administered to patients with esophageal carcinoma with the belief that this will both downstage the tumor and improve survival. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is currently the most accurate method of staging esophageal cancer for tumor (T) and lymph node (N) status. Because both EUS and neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal carcinoma are relatively new, there are few data examining the relationship between EUS stage and histological stage (the stage after resection) in patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy. METHODS: To determine the effect of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy on T and N stage as determined by EUS, we retrospectively compared two groups of patients with esophageal cancer staged by EUS. One group (33 patients) underwent neoadjuvant therapy (Walsh protocol: 5-fluorouracil, cisplatin, and 4000 rads of external beam radiation) followed by resection. The second group (22 patients), a control group, underwent resection without neoadjuvant therapy. We then compared histological stage to determine if there was a downstaging in the patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy. Survival was evaluated as well. RESULTS: EUS accurately predicted histologic stage. In the control group EUS overestimated T stage in 3 of 22 (13%), underestimated N stage in 2 of 22 (9%), and overestimated N stage in 2 of 22 (9%) of patients. Preoperative radiochemotherapy downstaged (preoperative EUS stage versus pathologic specimen) 12 of 33 (36%) of patients whereas only 1 of 22 (5%) of patients in the control group was downstaged. Complete response (no tumor found in the surgical specimen) was observed in 5 of 33 (15%) of patients receiving radiochemotherapy. Survival was prolonged significantly in patients receiving radiochemotherapy: 20.6 months versus 9.6 months for those (stage II or III) patients not receiving radiochemotherapy (P <0.01). Operative time, operative blood loss, and length of stay were not significantly different between groups. Perioperative mortality was higher in the radiochemotherapy group (13%) compared with the no radiochemotherapy group (5%) but did not achieve statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: EUS accurately stages esophageal carcinoma. Neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy downstages esophageal carcinoma for T and N status. In our nonrandomized study, neoadjuvant therapy conferred a significant survival advantage. Operative risk appears to be increased in patients receiving neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy prior to esophagectomy.     

胃癌超声内镜分期和术中分期之比较

目的：比较内镜超声（EUS）和手术时触摸法对判断胃癌浸润深度及胃周淋巴结转移的准确性。方法：73例经病理证实的胃癌病例，于术前接受EUS检查并在术时按Rhode原则进行评估，其结果与术后组织病理分期学相比较。结果：在判断胃癌浸润深度（T）上，EUS的准确性为80．8％（59／73），手术时评估的准确性为58．9％（43／73）。在判断淋巴结转移（N）上，前者的准确性为60．3％，后者为65．8％；但在26例NO病例中，EUS分期的准确性为92．3％而手术时评估的准确性仅为57．7％。结论：EUS判断胃癌的T及N0，较术中临床评估更为准确。     

Esophageal carcinoma: esophageal ultrasound assessment of preoperative chemotherapy.

The effect of preoperative chemotherapy in the treatment of esophageal carcinoma is difficult to assess because of the inadequacies of clinical staging. Endoscopic esophageal ultrasound (EUS) has been shown to be accurate in the clinical determination of depth of tumor invasion (T) and regional lymph node status (N). Therefore, EUS may be useful in assessing the effect of preoperative chemotherapy in the treatment of esophageal carcinoma. Eleven patients with operable adenocarcinoma of the esophagus or esophagogastric junction underwent staging by EUS before treatment. This was followed by two courses (10 patients) or one course (1 patient) of chemotherapy: etoposide, 120 mg/m2 for 3 days; doxorubicin hydrochloride, 20 mg/m2; and cisplatin, 100 mg/m2. Restaging by EUS was done after treatment. Ten patients then underwent resection of the tumor with lymphadenectomy. One patient was found to have metastatic disease at thoracotomy and did not undergo resection. However, tissue sampling was adequate for the determination of pathological stage. Independent pathological determinations of T and N were then obtained. On completion of chemotherapy, 9 patients (82%) had relief or reduction of preoperative symptoms, and 9 patients (82%) had either no evidence of tumor or reduction of tumor size by endoscopy. Despite this clinical and endoscopic response, no patient had EUS-documented and pathology-confirmed reduction of T. However, 2 patients had EUS-documented and pathology-confirmed progression of N. The accuracy of EUS in the determination of T was 82% and of N, 73%.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Endoscopic Ultrasound with Conventional Probe and Miniprobe in Preoperative Staging of Esophageal Cancer

Background Using an endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) miniprobe, even highly stenotic esophageal cancers precluding the passage of a conventional probe can be examined without prior dilatation. Objective To assess: (1) staging accuracy of conventional EUS probe and miniprobe, (2) variables influencing staging accuracy, (3) endoscopic features predicting tumor stage. Methods Ninety-seven consecutive patients with esophageal cancer undergoing complete surgical resection were included. Preoperative EUS was performed using a conventional probe in nonstenotic tumors and a miniprobe in stenotic tumors. Accuracy of EUS for T and N stages was compared to pathohistological staging. Results Overall EUS staging accuracy was 73.2% for T stage and 74.2% for N stage. It was similar for the miniprobe used in stenotic tumors vs the conventional probe used in nonstenotic tumors. Based on EUS, 84.5% of the patients would have been assigned to the appropriate therapy protocol (primary surgery vs neoadjuvant therapy). Endoscopic tumor features had no influence on staging accuracy. Tumor length >5 cm predicted advanced T and nodal positive stages. Conclusions The miniprobe allows adequate EUS staging of stenotic esophageal tumors precluding the passage of a conventional probe. Therefore, dilatation therapy of stenotic cancers to conduct conventional EUS should be avoided. R. Mennigen and D. Tuebergen contributed equally to this work Poster presentation during the Digestive Disease Week, Washington, DC, May 19–24, 2007.     

Serial endoscopic ultrasound in the assessment of response to chemoradiotherapy for carcinoma of the esophagus

The aim of the study was to assess whether endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) could accurately measure the locoregional response to chemoradiotherapy in patients with carcinoma of the esophagus. Seventeen patients with esophageal carcinoma underwent EUS examination before and on completion of chemoradiotherapy. The EUS findings were correlated with the results of histologic examination of the esophagectomy specimen. The accuracy of EUS in these patients was compared with the accuracy of EUS in a control group of 17 patients treated by surgery alone. In 16 of 17 patients EUS-determined tumor (T) stage was unchanged following treatment and in one patient there was T-stage progression. No patient demonstrated downstaging of the primary tumor according to classical EUS criteria. In 10 of 17 patients a reduction in maximum tumor depth of >-2 mm was observed (range 2 to 18 mm). Histologic examination revealed that four patients with squamous cell carcinoma had experienced a complete pathologic response. These four patients had significantly lower posttreatment EUS tumor depths compared to patients without a complete response (5.0 vs. 9.0 mm; P <0.05). Based on the post-treatment EUS examination, the accuracy was 59% for T stage and 59% for node (N) stage. The accuracy of EUS in patients treated by surgery alone was 94% for T stage and 94% for N stage, indicating a significant reduction in the accuracy of EUS in patients following chemoradiotherapy (P <0.05). The accuracy of EUS examination in patients with carcinoma of the esophagus treated by chemoradiotherapy was poor. EUS did not detect downstaging of the primary tumor, even in the presence of a complete pathologic response. EUS assessment of maximum tumor depth was a better measure of response to therapy. Presented at the Association of Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland, Edinburgh, May 1998, and published as an abstract in British Journal of Surgery 85 (Suppl 1):9, 1998.     

The useful combination of a higher frequency miniprobe and endoscopic submucosal dissection for the treatment of T1 esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND: There are few published data on the discrimination ability of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) among each subdivision of T1 cancer, and overdiagnosis is an unsolved problem that eventually causes overtreatment. The purpose of this study was to verify whether our treatment strategy incorporating EUS realizes a tailored patient management of T1 esophageal cancer. METHODS: This study comprised 20 esophageal cancer patients undergoing 12- to 20-MHz miniprobes for T staging and a 7.5-MHz dedicated echoendoscope for N staging. Initial therapy constituted endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for endosonographically node-negative, mucosal, or slight submucosal cancers and a primary esophagectomy with three-field lymphadenectomy for deeper cancers. If the ESD specimen revealed no cancer involvement of the muscularis mucosa, the patients entered a follow-up program; otherwise, they were advised to undergo a subsequent esophagectomy and three-field lymphadenectomy. RESULTS: Perfect discrimination accuracy was achieved among T1, T2, and T3 cancers. Whether cancer depth was up to the slight submucosal layer or deeper was correctly differentiated in 12 of 14 T1 cancers (86%). EUS categorized all patients correctly into candidates for either ESD or surgery. The pathological cancer depth of the resected specimens revealed that no patients experienced unnecessary overtreatment. CONCLUSIONS: A higher frequency miniprobe is useful for the detailed evaluation of cancer depth, contributing to decision making for treatment options of T1 esophageal cancer. A miniprobe and echoendoscope in combination with ESD provide an appropriately tailored management plan on an individual basis, avoiding unnecessary treatment or indicating radical surgery.     

The role of echo-endoscopy in the staging of squamous-cell carcinoma of the esophagus. The correlation between the surgical and anatomicopathological findings]

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is a relatively new diagnostic method to assess the extent and the depth of infiltration of esophageal carcinoma. METHODS: From October 1990, 100 patients affected by esophageal squamous cell carcinoma underwent preoperative evaluation with endoscopic ultrasonography, 85 of whom were operated on. The first 23 patients underwent endosonography with an Olympus GF-EUM2 with a 7.5 MHz echo-probe; the remaining 77 patients underwent EUS with an Olympus GF-EUM3 with a 7.5-12 MHz echo-probe. RESULTS: In 33 cases (33%), the procedure was not completed because of the impossibility of passing through the neoplastic stenosis. The depth of infiltration was correctly defined by EUS in 73 of 85 patients (86%) compared with 47% of Computed Tomography (CT) (p < 0.05). Overestimation occurred in 6 patients (7%), whereas underestimation occurred in 6 cases (7%). Lymph-node involvement was correctly classified by EUS in 50 of 57 patients (88%) compared with 39% of CT. CONCLUSIONS: EUS provides a high degree of accuracy in assessing both T and N parameters in staging esophageal cancer. The major problem of the method is still the frequent impossibility of passing through a neoplastic stenosis.     

Endoscopic ultrasonography in the staging of esophageal carcinoma after preoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: In past years multimodal neoadjuvant treatment for carcinoma of the esophagus has been used with increased frequency. Staging of the neoplasm still remains fundamental in evaluating the response to therapy and in planning operation. The aim of the present study was to assess the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in a group of patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus after undergoing radiotherapy and chemotherapy. METHODS: Among a group of 111 patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus and treated with preoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy, 87 were operated. In these patients it was possible to compare the results of EUS, with regard to depth of invasion of esophageal wall (T) and lymph node involvement (N), with the results of operation and histopathologic study. RESULTS: Feasibility of EUS before and after neoadjuvant treatment was 71.2% and 83.9%, respectively. The overall accuracy of EUS regarding the wall invasion was 47.9%. The more frequent error was overstaging, especially in patients with complete response and in patients with minimal residual disease. In the assessment of lymph node involvement, EUS showed an overall accuracy of 71.2% with a moderate kappa value. Sensitivity for N1 and NO was 73.7% and 68.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic ultrasonography was feasible in most patients after preoperative radiotherapy and chemotherapy, but our study documented a worsening of accuracy of EUS in the evaluation of T attributable to the confounding presence of radiation fibrosis and soft tissue reaction after radiotherapy and chemotherapy.     

Accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography in preoperative staging of esophageal carcinoma

BACKGROUND: With the advent of stage-adapted multimodal regimens for many gastrointestinal malignancies, accurate staging has become of utmost importance. In esophageal cancer, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) emerged as standard to determine T and N stage. OBJECTIVE: Since growth patterns of squamous carcinoma (SC) differs from adenocarcinoma (AC) and lymph nodes are located at various distances from the esophagus in a horizontal plane, we studied the accuracy of esophageal EUS as a function of tumor type and localization of the tumor within the esophagus. RESULTS: Overall staging accuracy was 79% for T and for N staging. Staging was more accurate for T3/4, when compared to T1/2 tumors, and for SC when compared to AC. Histological T1/2 stages were overstaged by EUS in 8/17 patients, mostly in patients with AC (6/10). The sensitivity of retrosternal pain and of dysphagia for extramural disease was 57 and 92% respectively, the specificity of pain for extramural disease was 73%, and of dysphagia 36%. Preoperative weight loss in this series correlated linearly with tumor stages. CONCLUSIONS: The accurate preoperative staging of T2 esophageal endodermal malignancies is crucial for treatment stratification but difficult to achieve by visual analysis of endosonography alone. Postacquisition processing of echoendosonographic images might further increase the accuracy of echoendosonography and aid in the critical differentiation of T2 versus T3 esophageal malignancies. Preoperative weight loss and retrosternal pain are good clinical indicators of extramural disease.     

Endoscopic ultrasonography in the diagnosis of esophageal carcinoma

Summary In selection for esophageal cancer treatment, it is necessary to evaluate the tumor stage. We have used endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) for diagnosis of the depth of cancer invasion and the presence of lymph node metastasis since 1983. The EUS image of the normal esophageal wall showed 5 layers. In all, 222 cases of esophageal cancer were examined with EUS, and a radical operation was performed on 139. In 78 of those cases, the scope was passed beyond the cancer site, and total observation was achieved (56%). The extent of cancer invasion was correctly determined in these 78 cases (84%). Thoracic lymph nodes that could be detected by EUS were located in the posterior mediastinum and measured more than 3 mm in diameter. Diagnostic criteria for lymph node metastasis were designated as follows: (1) spherical shape, (2) a distinct border, and (3) heterogenous echo spots within the nodes. The above criteria yielded a sensitivity of 87%, a specificity of 90%, and an overall accuracy of 89% according to the histological examination of the removed lymph nodes.     

Endoscopic ultrasonography in the diagnosis of esophageal carcinoma

In selection for esophageal cancer treatment, it is necessary to evaluate the tumor stage. We have used endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) for diagnosis of the depth of cancer invasion and the presence of lymph node metastasis since 1983. The EUS image of the normal esophageal wall showed 5 layers. In all, 222 cases of esophageal cancer were examined with EUS, and a radical operation was performed on 139. In 78 of those cases, the scope was passed beyond the cancer site, and total observation was achieved (56%). The extent of cancer invasion was correctly determined in these 78 cases (84%). Thoracic lymph nodes that could be detected by EUS were located in the posterior mediastinum and measured more than 3 mm in diameter. Diagnostic criteria for lymph node metastasis were designated as follows: (1) spherical shape, (2) a distinct border, and (3) heterogenous echo spots within the nodes. The above criteria yielded a sensitivity of 87%, a specificity of 90%, and an overall accuracy of 89% according to the histological examination of the removed lymph nodes.     

超声双重造影在胃癌术前TN分期中的价值

目的 在胃癌术前分期中,通过与超声内镜检查(EUS)对比分析超声双重造影(DCUS)检查的价值.方法 选择162例经病理活检证实为胃癌并进行手术切除的患者,手术前5 d内进行EUS及DCUS检查,并进行TNM分期,与术后病理检查结果对照得出正确率,并进行相互比较.结果 本组162例胃癌患者中TNM分期:42例为T1期,49例为T2期,56例为T3期,15例为T4期.DCUS和EUS术前T分期总的正确率分别为77.2%、74.7%(χ2=0.273,P=0.603),而在T3分期上DCUS优于EUS(χ2=5.009,P=0.025);在N分期上两者总的正确率分别为78.4%、57.4%(χ2=16.370,P=0.001),而两者的敏感性和特异性分别为78.4%比49.5%、78.5%比69.2%.在对阳性淋巴结诊断上DCUS的正确率较高(78.4%比49.5%,χ2=17.523,P<0.01),尤其是对低分化腺癌患者阳性淋巴结的诊断正确率较高(81.5%比42.6%,χ2=17.338,P<0.01).结论 DCUS检查在胃癌术前分期中有较好的应用价值,其在预测阳性淋巴结方面,尤其是判断低分化腺癌患者有无淋巴结转移上正确率高于EUS检查.     

Esophageal ultrasound and the preoperative staging of carcinoma of the esophagus

Esophageal ultrasound allows the esophageal wall to be viewed as five discrete layers. Lymph nodes are easily identified, and their size, shape, margin, and internal structure can be assessed. This provides an alternative method of preoperative (clinical) evaluation of the primary tumor [T] and the regional lymph nodes [N] of patients with carcinoma of the esophagus. Esophageal ultrasound was attempted in the clinical staging of 28 patients with carcinoma of the esophagus. Six patients (21%) were not assessed because of the inability to pass the esophageal ultrasound probe through the malignant stricture. The staging system for carcinoma of the esophagus developed by the International Union Against Cancer and the American Joint Committee on Cancer was used. Twenty-two patients had the true T determined by pathologic review of the resected esophagus. Esophageal ultrasound correctly identified T in 13 patients (59% accuracy). In four patients (18%) the disease was overstaged by esophageal ultrasound; all these patients had early T1 tumors confined to the submucosa. In five patients (23%) the disease was understaged by esophageal ultrasound; all of these patients had advanced tumors (four T3 and one T4) that invaded beyond the esophageal wall. Seven of the nine incorrect esophageal ultrasound determinations were called T2 (three T1, three T3, one T4), which suggests that the borders of the muscularis propria require careful attention when evaluated by esophageal ultrasound. Twenty patients had the true N determined by pathologic review of the resected specimen. Esophageal ultrasound correctly identified N in 14 patients (70% accuracy). Three patients were falsely identified as having N1 disease and three were falsely identified as having N0 disease. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for N assessment by esophageal ultrasound were 70%. Esophageal ultrasound provides an alternative method of visualization of the esophageal wall and regional lymph nodes. Our early experience shows promise for esophageal ultrasound in the clinical staging of carcinoma of the esophagus.     

超声内镜和CT对食管癌术前分期的诊断价值

目的探讨超声内镜（EUS）和CT检查对食管癌术前分期的诊断价值。方法于2002年7月至2004年1月对51例食管癌手术患者行术前EUS和CT及术后病理检查，将EUS和CT分期结果和手术病理分期结果进行对照。结果（1）EUS检查T、N分期的准确率分别为82．4％（42／51）和88.0％（45／51）；CT检查T、N分期的准确率分别为52.9％（27／51）和51．0％（26／51）；EUS与CT联合检查T、N分期的准确率分别为86.3％（44／51）和90．2％（46／51）。（2）3种检查方式分期结果与病理分期结果的一致性统计结果：EUS检查T、N分期的Kappa分别为0．700（P〈0．001）和0．763（P〈0.001）；CT分别为0．275（P=0．002）和0．006（P=0.964）；EUS加CT则分别为0．769（P〈0.001）和0．801（P〈0.001）。（3）各组间差异的统计结果：EUS与CT比较，PT=0．001（X^2=10.079），PN〈0.001（X^2=16．730）；EUS加CT与EUS比较，PT=0.586（X^2=0．297），PN=0．750（X^2=0.102）。结论EUS对食管癌术前T、N分期诊断准确率较高，诊断价值优于CT；EUS与CT联合应用未能显著提高食管癌T、N分期的诊断准确率。     

Endoscopic ultrasound in routine clinical practice for staging adenocarcinomas of the stomach and distal esophagus]

PROBLEM: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is an important diagnostic tool for determining the best therapeutic strategy (primary resection, neoadjuvant therapy or palliation only) to offer esophageal or gastric cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the present study (1992-2001),we evaluated the accuracy of EUS in adenocarcinomas of the distal esophagus and stomach and compared our results with pathologists findings as the gold standard. RESULTS: Of the 222 patients studied, the precise examination of 11% EUS was not completely possible due to severe tumor stenosis. The accuracy of EUS with respect to T, N+/- and TN+/- amounted to 51%, 65% and 34% in 131 patients with adenocarcinomas of the esophageal gastric junction and to 50%, 66% and 37% in 91 patients with adenocarcinomas located in the fundus, corpus or antrum of the stomach respectively. With respect to T-stage, the overstaging of tumors was more common than understaging, especially in pT2b-carcinomas. The subgroup analysis of the 131 EGJ adenocarcinoma patients showed that the results obtained by EUS were slightly better in type I (distal esophageal cancer) than in type II and III cardia carcinomas (proximal gastric cancer).When comparing two observation periods (1992-1996 and 1997-2001), the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound staging was very similar in both periods for T-category (51% vs 49%) and N-category (63% vs 64%) as well as for combined TN-staging (36% vs 35%) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In clinical routine examinations of adenocarcinomas of the stomach and the distal esophagus, the accuracy of EUS is not as good as the excellent results in the past--mostly obtained under study conditions--may suggest.     

食管癌术前放化疗后临床再分期的评价

目的探讨食管癌患者术前放化疗（pre-CRT）后采用影像学和内镜检查进行临床再分期的临床价值。方法对27例局部晚期食管鳞癌患者,在接受CRT治疗前采用颈部和胸部及腹部CT、食管超声内镜（EUS）、电子气管镜及PET-CT等检查进行临床分期;完成pre-CRT后再次进行分期。临床疗效评价采用RECIST标准,放化疗后3～6周施行手术,将术后病理结果与术前分期进行对照研究。对常规病理学检测为pT0和pN0病例的组织切片,采用免疫组织化学（免疫组化）染色检测原发灶及淋巴结中的微小肿瘤残留灶。结果全组pre．CRT后,CT对T及N分期的准确率分别为40．9％（9／22）和68．2％（15／22）,总的分期准确率为40．9％（9／22）;EUS对T及N分期的准确率分别为38．5％（5／13）和69．2％（9／13）,总的分期准确率为38．5％（5／13）。联合CT和EUS总的分期准确率为46．2％（6／13）。CRT结束后临床评价完全缓解（CR）5例,部分缓解（PR）14例,无缓解（SD）8例。5例临床评价cR者术后病理证实3例CR,1例pT3N1,1例虽经苏木精．伊红染色为pT0N0,但经免疫组化检测发现淋巴结存在微小肿瘤病灶残留。而术后病理结果pCR的5例患者中,除3例术前评价为CR外。另2例术前临床评价为PR。在15例N0的病例中,免疫组化检测有2例3个淋巴结仍可见食管癌细胞分布于其周边。结论目前常用的临床检查分期手段（食管吞钡、CT、EUS、内镜下病理活检等）和临床疗效评价手段（RECIST标准）对食管癌放化疗后的肿瘤组织反应评价准确率不高。建议CRT后临床评价食管癌CR的患者。仍应接受手术治疗。     

Endosonography in the preoperative evaluation of cancers of the esophagus

OBJECTIVE: To assess the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) for the local and regional staging of esophageal cancer, and its possible alteration resulting from the performance of preoperative chemoradiation. METHODS: Prospective study of 85 consecutive patients with esophageal cancer evaluated by EUS and operated on between January 1992 and December 1995. 28 of these patients had received previous induction therapy. In all cases, EUS examination was performed by the same physician not informed about the results of previous morphological explorations. Histopathological analysis of all operative specimens was performed by the same pathologist, not informed about the results of EUS. Data were collected by another independent observer. RESULTS: EUS examination resulted in incomplete staging in 8 patients (9.5%) with severe stenosis precluding endoscope passage. The accuracy, specificity and sensitivity of EUS in detecting the depth of esophageal involvement (T0-2 vs. T3-4) were 82.3%, 78%, and 86% respectively, and 72%, 70%, and 73% respectively for lymph node metastasis. The overall accuracy of EUS in identifying the preoperative stage was 67%, with a clear-cut alteration when patients had received induction therapy (61% vs 72%). On the other hand, 7 (64%) of the 11 patients thought to have a complete response at endosonography had no residual tumor. CONCLUSION: EUS provides precise information for the preoperative identification of locally advanced esophageal tumor, even after induction therapy. The latter alters the diagnostic accuracy of EUS, although complete responders could be identified in two-thirds of cases.     

Endoscopic ultrasonography for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the utility and shortcomings of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in tumor node metastasis (TNM) staging of gastric cancer and its influence on treatment. METHODS: The series included 126 patients (65 men and 44 women) with gastric cancer who underwent EUS from July 1997 to June 2003 at the National University Hospital, Singapore. The final analysis included 109 patients ranging in age from 29 to 97 years (mean, 63.13 years). RESULTS: EUS staging for primary disease: Specimen histology was available for 102 of the 109 patients who underwent surgery. The accuracy was 79% for T1, 73.9% for T2, 85.7% for T3, and 72.7% for T4. The overall accuracy was 80.4%. EUS staging for nodes: The sensitivity of EUS for detecting nodal disease was 74.2% for N0, 78% for N1, 53.8% for N2, and 50% for N3. Overall, the N staging by EUS showed a sensitivity of 82.8%, a specificity of 74.2%, a positive predictive value of 85.4%, a negative predictive value of 70.2%, and an accuracy of 77.7%. Radical gastrectomy was proposed for 95 patients on the basis of the staging with EUS and computed tomography (CT) scan, and 87 patients (91.6%) underwent the surgery. Preoperative staging accurately predicted the operative strategy for 89% of the patients. No significant predictor for accuracy was achieved by performing a logistic regression analysis for the correct staging of T stage using EUS and adjusting for tumor location (middle part/distal third/whole stomach vs proximal/cardioesophageal) (p = 0.873), operator (p = 0.546), and subject's sequence (initial 50 vs last 50 cases) (p = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Ultrasound is the most accurate and reliable method for the preoperative staging of gastric carcinomas, and it is mandatory if a tailored therapeutic approach is planned according to stage.