Preoperative staging of gastric adenocarcinoma: comparison of helical CT and endoscopic US.
Standard
Preoperative staging of gastric adenocarcinoma: comparison of helical CT and endoscopic US. / Habermann, Christian R; Weiss, Florian; Riecken, Rasmus; Honarpisheh, Human; Bohnacker, Sabine; Staedtler, Carsten; Dieckmann, Christoph; Schoder, Volker; Adam, Gerhard.
In: RADIOLOGY, Vol. 230, No. 2, 2, 2004, p. 465-471.Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journal › SCORING: Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Preoperative staging of gastric adenocarcinoma: comparison of helical CT and endoscopic US.
AU - Habermann, Christian R
AU - Weiss, Florian
AU - Riecken, Rasmus
AU - Honarpisheh, Human
AU - Bohnacker, Sabine
AU - Staedtler, Carsten
AU - Dieckmann, Christoph
AU - Schoder, Volker
AU - Adam, Gerhard
PY - 2004
Y1 - 2004
N2 - PURPOSE: To compare the performance of helical computed tomography (CT) and endoscopic ultrasonography (US) in the preoperative staging of gastric cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-one consecutive patients with a primary malignant gastric tumor (stage T2-T4) were preoperatively evaluated with both helical CT and endoscopic US within 3 days. Each tumor was staged according to the TNM classification system with both modalities. All patients subsequently underwent surgery. Results of CT and endoscopic US were compared with histologic staging of tumor invasion depth and regional lymph node metastasis. For comparison of CT and endoscopic US data, the marginal homogeneity test was used, and a P value of less than.05 was determined to indicate statistical significance. RESULTS: In comparison with histologic results, CT achieved correct T staging in 39 patients (76%) and correct N staging in 35 patients (70%). The corresponding results for endoscopic US achieved correct T staging in 44 patients (86%) and correct N staging in 45 patients (90%). There was no significant difference between T staging (P =.55) and N staging (P >.99). Because of challenging detection of wall layers, correct T staging was difficult for CT and endoscopic US in the differentiation of T2 and T3 lesions. CONCLUSION: Compared with endoscopic US, helical CT focused on the stomach provides valuable results regarding T and N staging in patients with gastric cancer.
AB - PURPOSE: To compare the performance of helical computed tomography (CT) and endoscopic ultrasonography (US) in the preoperative staging of gastric cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-one consecutive patients with a primary malignant gastric tumor (stage T2-T4) were preoperatively evaluated with both helical CT and endoscopic US within 3 days. Each tumor was staged according to the TNM classification system with both modalities. All patients subsequently underwent surgery. Results of CT and endoscopic US were compared with histologic staging of tumor invasion depth and regional lymph node metastasis. For comparison of CT and endoscopic US data, the marginal homogeneity test was used, and a P value of less than.05 was determined to indicate statistical significance. RESULTS: In comparison with histologic results, CT achieved correct T staging in 39 patients (76%) and correct N staging in 35 patients (70%). The corresponding results for endoscopic US achieved correct T staging in 44 patients (86%) and correct N staging in 45 patients (90%). There was no significant difference between T staging (P =.55) and N staging (P >.99). Because of challenging detection of wall layers, correct T staging was difficult for CT and endoscopic US in the differentiation of T2 and T3 lesions. CONCLUSION: Compared with endoscopic US, helical CT focused on the stomach provides valuable results regarding T and N staging in patients with gastric cancer.
M3 - SCORING: Zeitschriftenaufsatz
VL - 230
SP - 465
EP - 471
JO - RADIOLOGY
JF - RADIOLOGY
SN - 0033-8419
IS - 2
M1 - 2
ER -