EUS compared with CT, magnetic resonance imaging, and angiography and the influence of biliary stenting on staging accuracy of ampullary neoplasms.

BACKGROUND: Computerized tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and transabdominal ultrasound frequently fail to detect ampullary lesions. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is a sensitive modality for detecting and staging ampullary tumors. Accurate staging may be affected by biliary stenting, which is frequently performed in these patients with obstructive jaundice. The present study assessed the accuracy of ampullary tumor staging with multiple imaging modalities in patients with and those without endobiliary stents. METHODS: Fifty consecutive patients with ampullary neoplasms from two endosonography centers were preoperatively staged by EUS plus CT (37 patients), MRI (13 patients), or angiography (10 patients) over a 3(1/2) year period. Twenty-five of the 50 patients had a transpapillary endobiliary stent present at the time of endosonographic examination. Accuracy of EUS, CT, MRI, and angiography was assessed with the TNM classification system and compared with surgical-pathologic staging. The influence of an endobiliary stent present at the time of EUS on staging accuracy of EUS was also evaluated. RESULTS: EUS was more accurate than CT and MRI in the overall assessment of the T stage of ampullary neoplasms (EUS 78%, CT 24%, MRI 46%). No significant difference in N stage accuracy was noted between the three imaging modalities (EUS 68%, CT 59%, MRI 77%). EUS T stage accuracy was reduced from 84% to 72% in the presence of a transpapillary endobiliary stent. This was most prominent in the understaging of T2/T3 carcinomas. CONCLUSIONS: EUS is superior to CT and MRI in assessing T stage but not N stage of ampullary lesions. The presence of an endobiliary stent at EUS may result in underestimating the need for a Whipple resection because of tumor understaging.     

The diagnostic accuracy and strength of agreement between endoscopic ultrasound and histopathology in the staging of ampullary tumors

Aim

Ampullary tumors are rare. Reports on ampullary tumor staging are heterogeneous and combine both periampullary and ampullary tumors. This study assessed the performance of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in the local staging of ampullary tumors only.

Methods

Data were collected retrospectively. We included patients with an ampullary tumor who underwent EUS and surgical resection. Tumor (T) and nodal (N) TNM staging for EUS and histopathological (HP) staging were compared.

Results

From 2009 to 2010, a total of 79 patients with ampullary tumors were identified. Of these, 26 had both EUS and Whipple??s surgery and were included (28 did not undergo resection, 13 had palliative surgery only and 12 had resection without EUS). For T staging by HP, there were 2 (7.7?%) T1, 11 (42.3?%) T2, 12 (46.2?%) T3 and 1 (3.8?%) T4 tumors. The accuracy of EUS T staging was 73.1?% with a Kappa value of 0.564 (p?<?0.0001). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive values (NPV) of EUS, respectively were 50.0?%, 91.7?%, 33.3?% and 95.7?% for T1 tumors; 81.8?%, 80.0?%, 75.0?% and 85.7?% for T2; 75.0?%, 92.9?%, 90.0?% and 81.3?% for T3 tumors. For N staging by HP, 17 (65.4?%) were N0 and 9 (34.6?%) N1. The N staging diagnostic accuracy was 80.8?% with a Kappa value of 0.586 (p?=?0.003). The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV for N0 disease were 82.4?%, 77.8?%, 87.5?% and 70.0?%, respectively while for N1 they were 77.8?%, 82.4?%, 70.0?% and 87.5?%, respectively.

Conclusions

EUS had a moderate strength of agreement with histopathology for both T and N staging, and a high diagnostic accuracy for nodal staging.     

Endoscopic ultrasound in pancreatic tumor diagnosis

In a prospective study from 1988 to 1990, 132 patients with suspected pancreatic tumor were examined with endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), transabdominal ultrasound (US), computed tomography (CT), and ERCP. The final diagnosis of 102 pancreatic tumors of different origin (76 malignant and 26 inflammatory tumors) and the exclusion of a pancreatic tumor in 30 patients was made by operation (N = 47), puncture (N = 36), autopsy (N = 3), or follow-up of a mean of 51 weeks (N = 46). Sensitivity and specificity in pancreatic tumor diagnosis were significantly higher for EUS (99% and 100%) than for US (67%/40%) and CT (77%/53%) and equal to ERCP (sensitivity 90%). This was even more obvious in small pancreatic tumors of 3 cm and less. However, as with the other imaging procedures, EUS was not able to differentiate reliably malignant from inflammatory pancreatic masses (accuracy 76% for malignancy and 46% for focal inflammation). From analysis of the endosonographic pattern of pancreatic tumors, no consistent morphologic features were identified which could have been specifically attributed to malignant or inflammatory masses. Our results show that EUS is superior to US and CT and equal to ERCP in pancreatic tumor diagnosis. In contrast to the indirect evidence obtained by ERCP, EUS provides direct visualization of tumor size and shape in almost all patients examined. Thus, EUS should be considered early in the evaluation of patients with suspected pancreatic tumors.     

超声内镜对胆胰疾病诊断价值的探讨

目的 探讨超声内镜（EUS）对胆胰疾病的诊断价值。方法 采用超声胃镜（频率为7．5MHz和20Mnz），应用水囊法结合水充盈法，对54例临床疑为胆胰病变的患者进行EUS检查，并与腹部B超、CT及ERCP比较。结果 EUS、US、CT、ERCP对胆胰疾病诊断的阳性率分别为92．6％（50/54）、57．4％（31／54）、64．8％（35／54）及76．2％（32／42）。EUS对胰腺癌诊断的阳性率达100％。高于腹部B超、CT及ERCP；EUS对胆总管结石及慢性胰腺炎的准确率分别为100％和88．9％。结论 EUS对胆胰疾病的诊断率高于腹部B超，CT及ERCP影像检查，尤其对胆管扩张病因的定位及定性诊断均有较大的诊断价值。     

Radial endoscopic ultrasound and spiral computed tomography in the diagnosis and staging of periampullary tumors.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The early detection and accurate staging of pancreatic and ampullary cancer is of utmost importance for the achievement of surgical radical treatment. The aim of this study was to assess prospectively the role of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in detection and staging of pancreatic and ampullary cancer, comparing its results to those obtained with spiral computed tomography (SCT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-one patients with suspected pancreatic and ampullary tumors were included, 46 (75, 4%) of whom presented with obstructive jaundice. Patients underwent EUS and SCT within a 7-day period. Examiners were unaware of the previous imaging results, except conventional echography. Image interpretation was compared to surgical and histopathological findings. RESULTS: Fifty-six (91, 8%) patients were surgically explored. Clinical follow-up and/or tissue diagnosis determined the correct diagnosis in the remaining five patients. Pancreatic cancer and ampullary cancer were observed in 29 (47, 6%) and 10 (16, 4%) patients, respectively. Chronic pancreatitis and choledocholithiasis were the most common diagnosis in patients with non-neoplastic disease. EUS was more effective than SCT for the definition of the final diagnosis in patients with obstructive jaundice (87.0 vs. 67.4%, p = 0.04). Both exams were equally effective for detecting pancreatic cancer but EUS predicted more accurately the involvement of portal-mesenteric axis by the tumor (87.0 vs. 67.4%, p = 0.04). EUS was particularly useful in the diagnosis of cancer of papilla of Vater. CONCLUSION: In patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma without unequivocal signs of distant metastatic disease, EUS is more accurate than SCT to predict venous involvement by the tumor. EUS is superior to SCT to detect ampullary adenocarcinoma. Both methods are equally ineffective to detect nodal involvement in pancreatic and ampullary cancer.     

The impact of endoscopic ultrasound and computed tomography on the TNM staging of early cancer in Barrett's esophagus

INTRODUCTION: Computed tomography (CT) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) are part of the regular staging protocol in esophageal cancer. The value of the two methods was assessed in patients with early cancer in Barrett's esophagus. METHODS: One hundred consecutive patients (median age 64 yr, interquartile range [IQR] 58-72) with suspected early cancer in Barrett's esophagus who were referred to our hospital for endoscopic therapy were prospectively included in a standardized staging program with upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, EUS (7.5 MHz in all cases plus 12.5 or 20 MHz for elevated and/or depressed lesions), CT of the chest and upper abdomen, and abdominal ultrasonography. The results were summarized in accordance with the TNM classification. On the basis of the lymph node findings on CT and/or EUS, the patients were assigned to three categories: C1, no suspicious lymph nodes; C2, paraesophageal lymph nodes < or =1 cm in size at the tumor level, lymph nodes > or =1 cm in size not at the tumor level in the mediastinum or celiac trunk; and C3, paraesophageal lymph nodes > 1 cm in size at the tumor level. The EUS and CT findings were checked every 6 months in patients who underwent endoscopic treatment. Surgical resection was scheduled in operable patients if staging showed a T category higher than T1 and/or the lymph node staging was assessed as C3. Patients with suspected submucosal infiltration underwent diagnostic endoscopic resection, and if submucosal involvement was confirmed were referred for surgery. RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 25 months (IQR 19.5-30.0). The T category diagnosed with CT was < or = T1 in all patients. On EUS, the T category was classified as T1 in 92% of cases (N = 92) and as > T1 in 8% (N = 8, p < 0.05). Enlarged lymph nodes (C2 and C3) were detected in 45% of the patients. Significantly more C2 lymph nodes were diagnosed with EUS than CT (28 vs 19, p < 0.05). Lymph nodes at the level with the highest suspicion, C3, were detected using CT in only three of nine cases. Sensitivity of CT for N staging was not acceptable compared with EUS (38%vs 75%). No extranodal metastases were found on CT. CONCLUSIONS: In suspected early cancer in Barrett's esophagus, EUS is superior to CT for T staging and N staging. As CT had no influence on the TNM classification in any of these patients, it may be possible to dispense with this method as a staging procedure in patients with cancer in Barrett's esophagus. By contrast, EUS is required in order to differentiate between patients with cancer in Barrett's esophagus in whom endoscopic therapy is suitable and those in whom surgical treatment is required.     

超声内镜对胰管扩张性疾病的诊断价值

目的 探讨内镜超声检查术(EUS)在胰管扩张病因及恶性疾病邻近脏器浸润的诊断价值。方法 分析129例EUS检查发现胰管扩张的病因，并与同期接受CT检查(n＝40)与ERCP检查(n＝42)的结果相比较。对其中72例胰腺癌引起的胰管扩张病例，分析EUS对邻近脏器浸润检出率，并与CT、ERCP结果相比较。结果 129例胰管扩张病例中，胰腺癌、壶腹癌、慢性胰腺炎为常见病因。EUS对病因检出率较CT及ERCP高。EUS对胰腺癌邻近血管侵犯及淋巴结转移检出率较CT及ERCP高。结论 EUS对胰管扩张的病因诊断较CT及ERCP有明显的优越性，并能全面评估肿瘤的可切除性，指导制定治疗方案。     

Evaluation of endoscopic ultrasonography in the pre-operative staging of carcinoma of the ampulla of Vater and common bile duct

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) was performed in 23 patients with carcinoma of the ampulla of Vater (ampulla) and in 16 patients with common bile duct (CBD) carcinoma. These patients all underwent surgery. The layered structures of the duodenum, ampulla, and CBD, and the pancreas, portal vein, and regional lymph nodes were clearly identified by EUS using a transduodenal approach. With this technique, ampullary carcinoma appeared as a hypoechoic mass in 22 of 23 patients, and the 1 remaining cancer was not detected because of its small size. Carcinoma of the CBD also appeared as a hypoechoic mass in 12 of 16 patients. However, the remaining four appeared as hyperechoic masses. For these tumors, EUS had a high tumor detection rate (96 to 100%). In this regard, EUS was comparable to ERCP and was better than ultrasonography (US), CT, and angiography. Using EUS, we were also able to stage the extent of these tumors according to the involvement of the duodenal or CBD walls, invasion of the pancreas and portal vein, and spread to regional lymph nodes. The accuracy rates of cancer extent by EUS were 78% for ampullary carcinoma and 81% for CBD carcinoma when compared with surgical findings. We conclude that EUS is a valuable method for the detection and staging of tumors of the ampulla and CBD.     

Preoperative diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancer by endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)--a comparative study with other diagnostic tools]

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), ultrasonography (US), computed tomography (CT), and angiography (Angio) were performed in 26 patients with pancreatic cancer which were all resected. Preoperative findings of each diagnostic tools were compared with histological findings. In order to discuss the effectiveness of each body imagings, the preoperative staging of pancreatic cancer was evaluated in direct invasion to the anterior pancreatic capsule and stomach (S), direct invasion to the duodenum (D), direct invasion to the retroperitoneal adjacent vessels (Rp), and regional lymph node metastasis (N). The overall accuracy rate was 77% with EUS (50% with US, 38% with CT, 56% with Angio) in S, 81% with EUS (44% with US, 38% with CT, 63% with Angio) in D, 77% with EUS (58% with US, 42% with CT, 73% with Angio) in Rp, and 65% with EUS (58% with US, 38% with CT) in N. EUS revealed high accuracy rates because EUS images of the whole pancreas, surrounding organs and major vessels were clearly visualized through the gastroduodenal walls. Also, the accuracy rates of Angio in Rp and US in N were almost the same as those of EUS in Rp and N. However, it was difficult for every procedure to diagnose the retroperitoneal perineural invasion. From these results, EUS is one of the most beneficial procedures for detecting of the extent of cancer. EUS is expected to be popularized in the diagnosis and staging of the pancreatic cancer.     

Preoperative staging of gastric cancer by endoscopic ultrasonography and multidetector‐row computed tomography

Background and Aim: The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and multidetector‐row computed tomography (MDCT) for the locoregional staging of gastric cancer. EUS and computed tomography (CT) are valuable tools for the preoperative evaluation of gastric cancer. With the introduction of new therapeutic options and the recent improvements in CT technology, further evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of EUS and MDCT is needed. Methods: In total, 277 patients who underwent EUS and MDCT, followed by gastrectomy or endoscopic resection at Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University, from July 2006 to April 2008, were analyzed. The results from the preoperative EUS and MDCT were compared to the postoperative pathological findings. Results: Among the 277 patients, the overall accuracy of EUS and MDCT for T staging was 74.7% and 76.9%, respectively. Among the 141 patients with visualized primary lesions on MDCT, the overall accuracy of EUS and MDCT for T staging was 61.7% and 63.8%, respectively. The overall accuracy for N staging was 66% and 62.8%, respectively. The performance of EUS and MDCT for large lesions and lesions at the cardia and angle had significantly lower accuracy than that of other groups. For EUS, the early gastric cancer lesions with ulcerative changes had significantly lower accuracy than those without ulcerative changes. Conclusions: For the preoperative assessment of individual T and N staging in patients with gastric cancer, the accuracy of MDCT was close to that of EUS. Both EUS and MDCT are useful complementary modalities for the locoregional staging of gastric cancer.     

Endoscopic US and Dynamic CT in Preoperative TN Staging of Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Abstract: 〈Objective〉 The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy and limitations of endoscopic ultrasonography (US) and dynamic computed tomography (CT) in the preoperative evaluation of esophageal carcinoma. 〈Methods〉 Endoscopic US and dynamic CT were performed preoperatively in 96 patients with an esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. The results were correlated with the histology of specimens resected from patients who had undergone subtotal esophagectomy with lymph node dissection. 〈Results〉 According to the TN staging classification, endoscopic US was superior to dynamic CT for evaluating the depth of tumor infiltration (overall accuracy: EUS 75%, CT 35%) and in assessing regional lymph node metastases (overall accuracy: EUS 77%, CT 67%). However, the T4 stage was not accurately evaluated using endoscopic US in this study. Its specificity was high (97%) but its sensitivity was low (45%). 〈Conclusions〉 We believe endoscopic US is the most accurate method for local tumor staging in esophageal carcinoma. A limitation to endoscopic US staging performed with current instruments was severe stenosis, as it would not permit passage of the instrument (25% of all cases in this study).     

Comparative analysis of ERCP,IDUS,EUS and CT in predicting malignant bile duct strictures

AIM:To compare endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography(ERCP),intraductal ultrasound(IDUS),endosonography(EUS),endoscopic transpapillary forceps biopsies(ETP)and computed tomography(CT)with respect to diagnosing malignant bile duct strictures.METHODS:A patient cohort with bile duct strictures of unknown etiology was examined by ERCP and IDUS,ETP,EUS,and CT.The sensitivity,specificity,and accuracy rates of the diagnostic procedures were calculated based on the definite diagnoses proved by histopathology or long-term follow-up in those patients who did not undergo surgery.For each of the diagnostic measures,the sensitivity,specificity,and accuracy rates were calculated.In all cases,the gold standard was the histopathologic staging of specimens or long-term follow-up of at least 12 mo.A comparison of the accuracy rates between the localization of strictures was performed by using the Mann-Whitney U-test and theχ2test as appropriate.A comparison of the accuracy rates between the diagnostic procedures was performed by using the McNemar’s test.Differences were considered statistically significant if P<0.05.RESULTS:A total of 234 patients(127 males,107 females,median age 64,range 20-90 years)with indeterminate bile duct strictures were included.A total of 161patients underwent operative exploration;thus,a surgical histopathological correlation was available for those patients.A total of 113 patients had malignant disease proven by surgery;in 48 patients,benign disease was surgically found.In these patients,the decision for surgical exploration was made due to the suspicion of malignant disease in multimodal diagnostics(ERCP,CT,or EUS).Fifty patients had a benign diagnosis and were followed by a surveillance protocol with a followup of at least 12 mo;the median follow-up was 34 mo.Twenty-three patients had extended malignant disease,and thus were considered palliative.A comparison of the different diagnostic tools for detecting bile duct malignancy resulted in accuracy rates of 91%(ERCP/IDUS),59%(ETP),92%(IDUS+ETP),74%(EUS),and 73%(CT),respectively.In the subgroup analysis,the accuracy rates(%,ERCP+IDUS/ETP/IDUS+ETP;EUS;CT)for each tumor entity were as follows:cholangiocellular carcinoma:92%/74%/92%/70%/79%;pancreatic carcinoma:90%/68%/90%/81%/76%;and ampullary carcinoma:88%/90%/90%/76%/76%.The detection rate of malignancy by ERCP/IDUS was superior to ETP(91%vs 59%,P<0.0001),EUS(91%vs74%,P<0.0001)and CT(91%vs 73%,P<0.0001);EUS was comparable to CT(74%vs 73%,P=0.649).When analyzing accuracy rates with regard to localization of the bile duct stenosis,the accuracy rate of EUS for proximal vs distal stenosis was significantly higher for distal stenosis(79%vs 57%,P<0.0001).CONCLUSION:ERCP/IDUS is superior to EUS and CT in providing accurate diagnoses of bile duct strictures of uncertain etiology.Multimodal diagnostics is recommended.     

A prospective,blinded assessment of the impact of preoperative staging on the management of rectal cancer

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The influence of preoperative staging of rectal carcinoma on therapeutic decisions is uncertain. The use of fine-needle aspiration (FNA) of perirectal nodes in this setting has not been evaluated. The aim of this prospective, blinded study of patients with rectal cancer was to assess the impact of preoperative staging on treatment decisions and compare the tumor (T), nodal (N) staging performance characteristics of pelvic computed tomography (CT), rectal endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), and EUS FNA. METHODS: Eighty consecutive patients with newly diagnosed rectal cancer were prospectively evaluated. Therapy decisions were recorded after sequential disclosure of staging information to the patient's surgeon. RESULTS: In 31% of patients (95% confidence interval, 21%-42%), EUS staging information changed the surgeon's original treatment plan based on CT alone. The further addition of FNA changed therapy in one patient. T staging accuracy was 71% (CT) and 91% (EUS) (P = 0.02); N staging accuracy was 76% (CT), 82% (EUS), and 76% (EUS FNA) (P = NS). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative staging with EUS results in more frequent use of preoperative neoadjuvant therapy than if staging was performed with CT alone. The addition of FNA only changed the management of one patient, whereas FNA did not significantly improve N staging accuracy over EUS alone. FNA seems to offer the most potential for impacting management in those patients with early T stage disease, and its use should be confined to this subgroup of patients. EUS is more accurate than CT for determining T stage of rectal carcinoma.     

Preoperative evaluation of ampullary neoplasm with EUS and transpapillary intraductal US: a prospective and histopathologically controlled study

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic papillectomy is performed in selected patients with ampullary neoplasm, and, thus, accurate preoperative tumor staging is indispensable for its application. DESIGN: Prospective and histopathologically controlled study. SETTING: Single center. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: EUS and transpapillary intraductal US (IDUS) were performed in 40 patients with ampullary neoplasm before surgery (n = 30) or endoscopic papillectomy (n = 10). Ductal infiltration by a tumor into the bile duct (BD) or the pancreatic duct (PD) was also evaluated. The indication for endoscopic papillectomy was determined by findings obtained by EUS and IDUS. These findings were compared with histologic features of the resected specimens. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Thirty-three patients had adenocarcinoma (14 pT1, 11 pT2, 8 pT3-4) and 7 had adenoma. Tumor depiction by EUS and IDUS was achieved in 95% and 100% of the patients, respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of EUS and IDUS in T staging was 62% and 86% in adenoma and pT1, 45% and 64% in pT2, and 88% and 75% in pT3-4, respectively. The overall accuracy by EUS and IDUS in T staging was 63% and 78%, respectively (P = .14). In 10 patients who underwent endoscopic papillectomy, the accuracy of IDUS in T staging with EUS and IDUS was 80% and 100%, respectively. Ductal infiltration into the BD and the PD was correctly assessed in 88% and 90% by EUS and in both BD and the PD in 90% by IDUS, respectively. Ductal infiltration was correctly diagnosed by EUS and IDUS in all patients who had a papillectomy. CONCLUSION: Although IDUS had a tendency of overestimation in tumor staging for ampullary neoplasm, it can provide useful information for making therapeutic decisions, especially in cases appropriate for endoscopic papillectomy.     

Preoperative staging of gastric cancer by endoscopic ultrasound: the prognostic usefulness of ascites detected by endoscopic ultrasound

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is the standard modality in local preoperative staging of gastric cancers and is reputedly able to detect ascites. However, the association between ascites detected by EUS and local tumor staging, peritoneal carcinomatosis, or survival after surgery is not well documented. GOALS: To assess the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of EUS in the preoperative staging and detection of ascites in gastric cancers. We also try to correlate ascites with histologic staging, tumor differentiation, and survival rate of gastric carcinoma after surgery. STUDY: The retrospective analysis was made in 57 consecutive patients with histologically confirmed gastric adenocarcinomas that underwent EUS before surgery. The accuracy of EUS was compared with the final surgical-pathologic findings. We estimated the prognostic usefulness by analyzing the clinicopathologic features of gastric adenocarcinomas and following up their survival rates. RESULTS: The overall T staging was 88% accurate by EUS. The accuracy for T staging was as follows: T1, 100%; T2, 33%; T3, 93%; and T4, 100%. About 50% of T2 cases were overstaged. The overall accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of detecting lymph node metastasis by EUS were 79%, 79%, and 80%, respectively. One of the seven T1 cancers had regional lymph node metastasis, and it was missed by EUS, although the T classification was precisely staged based on finding submucosal invasion. A total of 22 patients (39%) had ascites detected by EUS; both the sensitivity and specificity of EUS in demonstrating ascites were 100% in our study. Ascites was significantly correlated with the depth of tumor invasion ( = 0.036), lymph node metastasis ( = 0.008), and poor cellular differentiation ( = 0.007), but it was not significantly correlated with macroscopic peritoneal carcinomatosis. The survival rate after surgical treatment was poor in those with gastric cancers with lymph node metastasis, ascites, or poorly differentiated tumors ( < 0.05). However, multivariate analysis showed that lymph node metastasis was the only significant prognostic predictor ( = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic ultrasound is a valuable diagnostic tool in the local staging of gastric cancers and demonstration of ascites. Although the surgical treatment of gastric cancers with lymph node metastasis, ascites, or poor differentiation had poorer survival rate, only lymph node metastasis was proved to be a significant prognostic predictor in multivariate analysis.     

Endoscopic ultrasound staging of rectal cancer: diagnostic value before and following chemoradiation

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has been shown to be a reliable tool for staging rectal cancer. Nevertheless, the accuracy of EUS after chemoradiation remains unclear; therefore the purpose of the present paper was to compare the accuracy of EUS staging for rectal cancer before and following chemoradiation. METHODS: Patients with rectal cancer undergoing EUS staging were stratified into two groups. Group I consisted of 66 patients who underwent surgery following EUS staging without preoperative chemoradiation. Group II consisted of 25 patients who had EUS evaluation following chemoradiation. The EUS staging was compared to surgical/pathological staging. RESULTS: The accuracy of the T staging for group I was 86% (57/66). Inaccurate staging was mainly associated with overstaging EUS T2 tumors. The accuracy of the N staging for group I was 71% (47/66). The accuracy of EUS for a composite T and N staging relevant to treatment decisions in group I was 91%. In group II, the accuracy of T and N staging was 72% (18/25) and 80% (20/25), respectively. Overstaging EUS T3 tumors accounted for most inaccurate staging. The EUS staging predicted post-chemoradiation T0N0 stage correctly in only 50% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative staging of rectal cancer by EUS is a useful modality in determining the need for preoperative chemoradiation. The EUS T staging following chemoradiation appears to be less accurate. Detection of complete response may be insufficient for selecting patients for limited surgical intervention.     

A prospective study of complications of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasound in an ambulatory endoscopy center.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Our aim was to assess the safety of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in an ambulatory endoscopy center (AEC). METHODS: Complications occurring in consecutive patients undergoing ERCP or EUS from March 2003 to February 2004 at our AEC were recorded prospectively. Comprehensive complications were defined as consensus criteria plus other adverse events: use of reversal agents, unplanned hospital admission, hospitalization beyond planned 23-hour observation, unplanned emergency department or primary care provider visit, and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: A total of 497 patients (median age, 57 y; 82% American Society of Anesthesiologists class II or III) underwent 685 procedures. Monitored or general anesthesia was used in 25% of EUS and 50% of ERCP procedures. ERCP interventions were as follows: biliary or pancreatic stenting (N = 168), stone extraction (N = 70), sphincterotomy (N = 62), sphincter of Oddi manometry (N = 53), other (N = 66). EUS indications were as follows: known or suspected pancreatic mass (N = 103), upper-gastrointestinal mass/submucosal lesion (N = 71), luminal malignancy staging (N = 40), other (N = 96); 52% had EUS fine-needle aspiration. There was follow-up evaluation in 94% of the patients. There were 43 comprehensive ERCP complications (12.9%), 18 (5.4%) of these fit consensus criteria: pancreatitis (N = 14), cholangitis (N = 2), and perforation (N = 2). There were 9 comprehensive EUS complications (2.9%), 2 (.7%) of these fit consensus criteria: pancreatitis (N = 1) and bleeding (N = 1). Other adverse events for ERCP and EUS were as follows: prolongation of 23-hour observation (N = 14), emergency room visits (N = 3), primary care physician visits (N = 6), use of reversal agents (N = 3), unplanned admissions (N = 2), infection (N = 3), and death (N = 1). CONCLUSIONS: ERCP and EUS can be performed in an AEC, provided mechanisms for admission and anesthesia support are in place. The assessment of comprehensive complications is more reflective of adverse events related to ERCP and EUS than consensus criteria alone.     

内镜超声检查术对胰腺肿瘤早期诊断的价值

目的探讨内镜超声检查术（EUS）、管内超声检查术（IDUS）及超声内镜引导下细针穿刺术（EUS-FNA）对胰腺肿瘤早期诊断的价值。方法回顾性分析和比较188例胰腺小占位病灶的EUS、IDUS、EUS—FNA及其他影像学检查结果。结果（1）EUS诊断小胰腺癌的准确率是95．6％（44／46）,优于B超58．6％（27／46）、CT77．4％（24／31）、MRI76．2％（16／21）及内镜逆行胰胆管造影术（ERCP）85．3％（29／34）。小胰腺癌EUS声像图主要表现为类圆形、边界清楚、边缘不规则的低回声肿块,内部回声多均匀。（2）25例胰腺小占位病灶行IDUS检查,其准确率是100．0％（25／25）,明显优于B超32．0％（8／25）、CT52．9％（9／17）及MRI57．9％（11／19）等检查。（3）18例胰腺小占位病灶行EUS—FNA,其准确率是66．7％（12／18）。（4）EUS诊断胰腺假性囊肿的准确率是100．0％（27／27）,明显优于13超52．0％（13／25）、CT66、7％（12／18）、MRI82．4％（14／17）及ERCP78．9％（15／19）;对胰腺囊性肿瘤分类鉴别诊断总的准确率是57．7％（15／26）,优于B超19．2％（5／26）、CT36．4％（8／22）、MRI37．5％（6／16）及ERCP50．0％（7／14）等检查。结论EUS、IDUS及EUS-FNA对胰腺肿瘤的早期诊断具有重要价值。     

Role of EUS in the preoperative staging of pancreatic cancer: a large single-center experience

BACKGROUND: Current methods for staging pancreatic cancer can be inaccurate, invasive, and expensive. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is reported to be highly accurate for local staging of gastrointestinal tumors including pancreatic cancer. The aim of this study was to assess the utility of EUS and CT for staging pancreatic cancer by comparing staging accuracies in surgical patients and evaluating the potential impact of EUS staging and training. METHODS: This was a preoperative comparison of the diagnostic operating characteristics of these procedures in a referral-based academic medical center. Data were collected on 151 consecutive patients referred with confirmed pancreatic cancer between April 1990 and November 1996. All patients had preoperative CT and EUS performed for staging. In patients undergoing surgery, the surgical staging and/or findings were used to confirm EUS and CT staging. RESULTS: Eighty-one (60%) of 151 patients underwent surgery and made up the study subset. In these 81 patients, surgical exploration provided a final T staging in 93% (75 of 81), N staging in 88% (71 of 81) and data on vascular invasion in 93% (75 of 81). In the surgical patient group, with surgical correlation, EUS accuracy for T staging was as follows: T1 92%, T2 85%, T3 93%, and for N staging was: N0 72%, and N1 72%. CT accuracy for T staging was as follows: T1 65%, T2 67%, T3 38%, and for N staging was as follows: N0 52% and N1 100%. CT failed to detect a mass in 26% of patients with a confirmed tumor at surgery. Overall accuracy for T and N staging was 85% and 72% for EUS and 30% and 55% for CT, respectively. The ability to accurately predict vascular invasion was 93% for EUS and 62% for CT (p < 0.001). EUS was 93% accurate for predicting local resectability versus 60% for CT (p < 0.001). Last, the data were divided into two groups for the senior endosonographer's experience: procedures performed between 1990 and 1992 (98 cases) and 1993 and 1994 (53 cases). This analysis revealed that 7 of 9 instances of mis-staging (78%) occurred in the earlier group, during the learning phase for EUS. CONCLUSIONS: EUS is more accurate than CT for staging pancreatic malignancies, including predicting vascular invasion and local resectability. EUS staging was significantly better than CT for T1, T2, and T3 tumors. EUS staging accuracy improved after 100 cases, thus suggesting a correlation between the accuracy of EUS staging and the number of procedures performed.     

Possibilities of interventional endoscopic ultrasound

Since endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) was developed in the 1990s, EUS has become widely accepted as an imaging tool. EUS is categorized into radial and linear in design. Radial endoscopes provide cross-sectional imaging of the mediastinum, gastrointestinal tract, liver, spleen, kidney, adrenal gland, and pancreas, which has highly accuracy in the T and N staging of esophageal, lung, gastric, rectal, and pancreatic cancer. Tumor staging is common indication of radial-EUS, and EUSstaging is predictive of surgical resectability. In contrast, linear array endoscope uses a side-viewing probe and has advantages in the ability to perform EUSguides fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), which has been established for cytologic diagnosis. For example, EUS-FNA arrows accurate nodal staging of esophageal cancer before surgery, which provides more accurate assessment of nodes than radial-EUS imaging alone. EUS-FNA has been also commonly used for diagnose of pancreatic diseases because of the highly accuracy than US or computed tomography. EUS and EUS-FNA has been used not only for TNM staging and cytologic diagnosis of pancreatic cancer, but also for evaluation of chronic pancreatitis, pancreatic cystic lesions, and other pancreatic masses. More recently, EUS-FNA has developed into EUS-guided fine needle injection including EUS-guided celiac plexus neurolysis, celiac plexus block, and other "interventional EUS" procedures. In this review, we have summarized the new possibilities offered by "interventional EUS".