scholarly journals Role of endorectal ultrasonography in preoperative staging of rectal cancer

2002 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomislav Petrovic ◽  
Zoran Radovanovic ◽  
Milan Breberina
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Preoperative Staging ◽  
Endorectal Ultrasonography

Role of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in preoperative staging of rectal cancer

1996 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 417 ◽  
Author(s):  
U. Choudhry ◽  
H.W. Boyce ◽  
M. Johnson ◽  
J. Marcet ◽  
T. Yeatman
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Endoscopic Ultrasonography ◽  
Preoperative Staging

scholarly journals Role of Imaging in Rectal Cancer

JMS SKIMS ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-6
Author(s):  
Ajaz Ahmad Malik
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Rectal Wall ◽  
Preoperative Staging ◽  
Positron Emission ◽  
Adjacent Structures ◽  
Tumor Involvement ◽  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging Mri ◽  
Optimal Treatment Strategy

THIS ARTICLE HAS NO ABSTRACT (FIRST 100 WORDS OF THE ARTICLE ARE DISPLAYED): Staging of rectal cancer is necessary to provide the optimal treatment strategy although proctoscopy or sigmoidoscopy with biopsy are diagnostic. This is achieved by locoregional assessment of the disease by various available radiological investigations. Staging information includes extent of tumor involvement of the rectal wall and adjacent structures, presence or absence of adjacent lymphadenopathy, and determination of distant metastasis. Several modalities exist for the preoperative staging of rectal cancer, like computed tomography (CT); magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with traditional body, endorectal, or phasedarray coils; endorectal ultrasonography (ERUS) with rigid or flexible probes; and positron emission tomography (PET) with and without. JMS 2012;15(1):4-6.

PREOPERATIVE STAGING OF RECTAL CANCER WITH ENDORECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY

1993 ◽  
Vol 86 (Supplement) ◽  
pp. 16
Author(s):  
Paul R. Williamson ◽  
Sergio W. Larach
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Preoperative Staging ◽  
Endorectal Ultrasonography

scholarly journals Endorectal ultrasonography versus phased-array magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative staging of rectal cancer

2008 ◽  
Vol 14 (22) ◽  
pp. 3504 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmet Mesrur Halefoglu ◽  
Sadik Yildirim ◽  
Omer Avlanmis ◽  
Damlanur Sakiz ◽  
Adil Baykan
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Phased Array ◽  
Preoperative Staging ◽  
Endorectal Ultrasonography ◽  
Resonance Imaging

scholarly journals The value of endorectal ultrasonography in rectal cancer staging

2008 ◽  
Vol 61 (11-12) ◽  
pp. 557-561 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zoran Radovanovic ◽  
Dragana Radovanovic ◽  
Milan Breberina ◽  
Tomislav Petrovic ◽  
Andrija Golubovic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Preoperative Staging ◽  
Cancer Staging ◽  
Preoperative Chemoradiation ◽  
Depth Of Invasion ◽  
Endorectal Ultrasonography ◽  
Accuracy Rate ◽  
Diagnostic Modality ◽  
Rectal Cancer Staging ◽  
First Choice

Introduction Preoperative staging of rectal cancer is considered essential to select patients adequately for different therapeutic regimes. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the accuracy of endorectal ultrasonography in preoperative staging of rectal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS Fifty rectal cancer patients (31 men, 19 women) underwent endorectal ultrasonography with a 7.5-MHz probe. Thirty-eight of these patients had preoperative chemoradiation and in these patients examination was done before and after the radiotherapy treatment. The results of examinations were compared with the histological findings of the resected specimens. RESULTS Histopathology showed 4 stage T0, 3 stage T1, 12 stage T2, 30 stage T3, and one stage T4 tumor. Nodal metastases were seen in 17 patients. The overall accuracy of endorectal ultrasonography for determining the depth of invasion (T stage) was 66% (33/50). The accuracy rate of T1 was 100% (1/1), T2 was 45% (9/20), T3 was 79% (22/28), and T4 was 100% (1/1). Overstaging was 18% (9/50) and understaging 16% (8/50). In staging lymph node metastasis, the overall accuracy rate was 70% (18/25) with 18% (9/50) overstaged and 12% (6/50) understaged. With regard to nodal involvement, sensitivity was 65% and specificity 73%. Regarding penetration of the rectal wall (stages T1 and T2 vs stages T3 and T4 / Dukes' classification A versus B), endorectal sonography showed sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 74%, 68%, and 72%, respectively. CONCLUSION Endorectal ultrasonography is a valuable diagnostic modality for rectal cancer staging. It is fast, safe, accurate, well tolerated by the patient and cheap procedure and therefore should be used as a diagnostic modality of the first choice in rectal cancer staging although one must take into consideration possible limitations in cases of preoperative chemoradiation.

scholarly journals The Role of 3-D Endorectal Ultrasound in Rectal Cancer: Our Experience

2014 ◽  
Vol 99 (2) ◽  
pp. 106-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikola Y. Kolev ◽  
Anton Y. Tonev ◽  
Valentin L. Ignatov ◽  
Aleksander K. Zlatarov ◽  
Vasil M. Bojkov ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Rectal Cancer ◽  
Rectal Wall ◽  
Preoperative Staging ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Cancer Staging ◽  
Endorectal Ultrasound ◽  
Diagnostic Methods ◽  
Diagnostic Modality ◽  
Locoregional Staging

Abstract In the last 20 years, endorectal ultrasound (ERUS) has been one of the main diagnostic methods for locoregional staging of rectal cancer. ERUS is accurate modality for evaluating local invasion of rectal carcinoma into the rectal wall layers (T category). Adding the three-dimensional modality (3-D) increases the capabilities of this diagnostic tool in rectal cancer patients. We review the literature and report our experience in preoperative 3-D ERUS in rectal cancer staging. In the group of 71 patients, the staging of preoperative 3-D endorectal ultrasonography was compared with the postoperative morphologic examination. Three-dimensional ERUS preoperative staging was confirmed with morphologic evaluation in 66 out of 71 cases (92.9%). The detection sensitivities of rectal cancer with 3-D ERUS were as follows: T1, 92.8%; T2, 93.1%; T3, 91.6%; and T4, 100.0%; with specificity values of T1, 98.2%; T2, 95.4%; T3, 97.8%; and T4, 98.5%. Three-dimensional ERUS correctly categorized patients with T1, 97.1%; T2, 94.3%; T3, 95.7%; and T4, 98.5%. The percentage of total overstaged cases was 2.75% and that of understaged cases was 6.87%. The metastatic status of the lymph nodes was determined with a sensitivity of 79.1% (19 of 24), specificity of 91.4% (43 of 47), and diagnostic accuracy of 87.3% (62 of 71). In our experience, 3-D ERUS has the potential to become the diagnostic modality of choice for the preoperative staging of rectal cancer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document