Estadificación del cáncer de recto

Learning curve of endorectal ultrasonography in preoperative staging of rectal carcinoma

Accurate preoperative staging of rectal carcinoma is essential for optimal treatment. This study was designed to evaluate the accuracy and learning curve of endorectal ultrasonography (ERUS) in the preoperative staging of rectal carcinoma. We retrospectively analyzed the records of patients with rectal carcinoma who underwent preoperative ERUS followed by curative surgery at the Shanxi Province Tumor Hospital between January, 2007 and March, 2010. The patients were divided into three groups, namely A, B and C, depending on whether the examination was performed between January and December, 2007, between January and December, 2008 or between January, 2009 and March, 2010, respectively. Five physicians with no prior experience in ERUS performed the examinations. We compared the ERUS staging with the pathological findings using the tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) classification. The accuracy of ERUS in T and N staging after each additional consecutive 20 patients was calculated for physicians D, E and F. A total of 319 patients underwent ERUS prior to surgery. There were 38 patients in group A, 135 in group B and 146 in group C. Two of the five physicians performed only 47 of the 319 examinations, whereas the remaining 272 patients were examined by physicians D (n=162), E (n=64) and F (n=46). The overall accuracy in assessing the extent of rectal wall invasion (T) was 67%, with 16% of the cases overstaged and 17% understaged and the accuracy in assessing nodal involvement (N) was 66%, with 11% of the cases overstaged and 23% understaged. The total T and N staging accuracy of physicians D, E and F was 75 and 72%; 59 and 59%; and 50 and 52%, respectively. For physicians D, E and F, the accuracy of T and N staging after each additional 20 patients was calculated and the curve of the accuracy reached a plateau after physician D completed 80 cases. Therefore, ERUS is a valuable tool for assessing the depth of tumor invasion and it appears that after ~80 cases a physician may be considered able to apply it efficiently.

[Prognostic factors and functional imaging in rectal cancer]

The outcome of treatment for rectal cancer in recent years has been improved by diverse advances in the field of surgery and in neoadjuvant oncologic therapies. Heald's introduction of the concept of the mesorectum as an anatomical unit (total mesorectal excision) in 1982 and the generalization of preoperative radiochemotherapy have improved the prognosis in a significant number of patients. Owing to these advances, it has become necessary for imaging studies to define a series of prognostic factors for tumors, both before and after neoadjuvant treatment, to make it possible to tailor treatment for individual patients with rectal tumors. On the other hand, the advent of functional and molecular imaging techniques has provided a way to study a series of distinctive tumor characteristics in vivo, including the angiogenesis, metabolism, or cellularity of rectal tumors, and these techniques are making a growing contribution to the prognosis, staging, treatment planning, and evaluation of the response to therapy in patients with rectal cancer.

EUS and magnetic resonance imaging in the staging of rectal cancer: a prospective and comparative study

BACKGROUND

Accurate locoregional staging is crucial in rectal cancer for deciding patient management because the administration of neoadjuvant therapy depends on it. EUS and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are used indistinctly in the pretherapeutic workup of rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To prospectively compare the performance of EUS and MRI in the locoregional staging of rectal cancer in a large series of patients.

DESIGN

Prospective and comparative study.

SETTING

Tertiary center.

PATIENTS

Patients with histologically proven rectal cancer.

INTERVENTIONS

EUS and MRI were performed in all patients by a different operator unaware of the results of the other procedure.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Epidemiological, clinical, radiological, and echographic variables were evaluated. Pathological examination of the surgical specimen was used as the criterion standard.

RESULTS

Ninety patients (54 men and 36 women with a mean age of 68 ± 12 years; range 33-87 years) constitute the final sample of this study. Most of the tumors were stages T2-T3 (85%; 95% CI, 77%-92%). Twenty of them (22%; 95% CI, 14%-32%) were stenotic and 24 (27%; 95% CI, 18%-37%) had polypoid morphology. The accuracy of T staging was very similar for EUS and MRI for stage T2 (76%; 95% CI, 65%-84% and 77%; 95% CI, 67%-85%, respectively; P = not significant) and stage T3 (76%; 95% CI, 65%-84% and 83%, 95% CI, 73%-90%, respectively; P = not significant). MRI was not able to visualize any T1 tumor, whereas EUS understaged all T4 tumors. The univariate analysis showed that the polypoid morphology of the tumor inversely correlated with T staging on MRI. The accuracy of MRI for N staging was higher than that of EUS, although the difference did not reach statistical significance (79%; 95% CI, 65%-88% and 65%; 95% CI, 51%-78%, respectively). When performing the univariate analysis to assess the reasons for this difference, the presence of a stenotic tumor was the only parameter significantly related to a poorer performance of EUS in N staging.

LIMITATIONS

The small number of early and locally advanced lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS and MRI have similar accuracy in the T and N staging in rectal cancer. The presence of stenosis and polypoid morphology is inversely associated with accuracy for either EUS or MRI.