Endorectal ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in rectal cancer staging

Performance of dual-layer spectrum CT virtual monoenergetic images to assess early rectal adenocarcinoma T-stage: comparison with MR

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the image quality and utility of virtual monoenergetic images (VMI) of dual-layer spectrum computed tomography (DLSCT) in assessing preoperative T-stage for early rectal adenocarcinoma (ERA).

METHODS

This retrospective study included 67 ERA patients (mean age 62 ± 11.1 years) who underwent DLSCT and MR examination. VMI 40-200 keV and poly energetic image (PEI) were reconstructed. The image noise, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and tumor contrast of different energy levels were calculated and compared, respectively. Two radiologists independently assess the image quality of the VMIs and PEI using 5-point scales. The diagnostic accuracies of DLSCT and HR-MRI for ERA T-staging were evaluated and compared.

RESULTS

The maximum noise was observed at VMI 40 keV, and noise at VMI 40-200 keV in the arterial and venous phases showed no significant difference (all p > 0.05). The highest SNR and CNR were obtained at VMI 40 keV, significantly greater than other energy levels and PEI (all p < 0.05). Tumor contrast was more evident than PEI at 40-100 keV in the arterial phase and at 40 keV in the venous phase (all p < 0.05). When compared with PEI, VMI 40 keV yielded the highest scores for overall image quality, tumor visibility, and tumor margin delineation, especially in the venous phase (p < 0.05). The overall diagnostic accuracy of DLSCT and HR-MRI for T-stage was 65.67 and 71.64% and showed no significant difference (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

VMI 40 keV improves image quality and accuracy in identifying lesions, providing better diagnostic information for ERA staging.

CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

Low-keV VMI from DLSCT can improve tumor staging accuracy for early rectal carcinoma, helping guide surgical intervention decisions, and has shed new light on the potential breakthroughs of assessing preoperative T-stage in RC.

KEYPOINTS

• Compared with PEI, low-keV VIM derived from DLSCT, particularly at the 40 keV, significantly enhanced the objective and subjective image quality of ERA. • Using VMI 40 keV helped increase lesion detectability, leading to improved diagnostic accuracy for ERA. • Low-keV VMI from DLSCT has shed new light on the potential breakthroughs of assessing preoperative T-stage in RC.

MRI-based nomogram analysis: recognition of anterior peritoneal reflection and its relationship to rectal cancers

Background

This study is aimed to explore the factors influencing the visualization of the anterior peritoneal reflection (APR) and evaluated the feasibility of measuring the distance from the anal verge to APR (AV-APR), the tumor height on MRI and the accuracy of determining the tumor location with regard to APR.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 110 patients with rectal cancer. A univariate and multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify the independent factors (age, sex, T stage, the degree of bladder filling, pelvic effusion, intraoperative tumor location, BMI, uterine orientation, the distance from seminal vesicle/uterus to rectum) associated with the visualization of the APR on MRI. The nomogram diagram and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC curve) were established. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to evaluate the consistency of the distance of AV-APR. The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to characterize the agreement between measurements of the tumor height by colonoscopy and MRI. The Kappa statistics was used to evaluate the value of MRI in the diagnosis of the tumor location with regard to the APR.

Results

Multivariate logistic regression showed that BMI (P = 0.031, odds ratio, OR = 1.197), pelvic effusion (P = 0.020, OR = 7.107) and the distance from seminal vesicle/uterus to the rectum (P = 0.001, OR = 3.622) were correlated with the visualization of APR. The cut-off point of BMI and the distance from seminal vesicle/uterus to the rectum is 25.845 kg/m² and 1.15 cm. The area under curve (AUC) (95% Confidence Interval, 95% CI) of the combined model is 0.840 (0.750–0.930). The favorable calibration of the nomogram showed a non-significant Hosmer–Lemeshow test statistic (P = 0.195). The ICC value (95% CI) of the distance of AV-APR measured by two radiologists was 0.981 (0.969–0.989). The height measured by MRI and colonoscopy were correlated with each other (r = 0.699, P < 0.001). The Kappa value was 0.854.

Conclusions

BMI, pelvic effusion, and the distance from seminal vesicle/uterus to rectum could affect the visualization of APR on MRI. Also, it’s feasible to measure the distance of AV-APR, the tumor height, and to evaluate the tumor location with regard to APR using MRI.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12880-021-00583-7.

Is It Time to Introduce PET/CT in Rectal Cancer Guidelines?

At the moment, international guidelines for rectal cancer suggest to consider F-FDG PET/CT scan in a few conditions: (1) at disease presentation in case of suspected or proven metastatic synchronous adenocarcinoma with potentially curable M1 disease; (2) in the recurrence workup for serial carcinoembryonic antigen level elevation; (3) in the recurrence workup with metachronous metastases documented by CT, MRI, or biopsy; (4) in case of strong contraindication to IV contrast agent administration; and (5) to evaluate an equivocal finding on a contrast-enhanced CT or MRI. PET/CT is not indicated in the follow-up or surveillance of rectal cancer. On the other hand, an attentive evaluation of the literature shows that PET/CT may also be used in some circumstances with significant levels of diagnostic accuracy. This review article aims to emphasize differences between current international guidelines and scientific literature in the role of PET/CT in rectal cancer.

Pathological complete response due to a prolonged time interval between preoperative chemoradiation and surgery in locally advanced rectal cancer: analysis from the German StuDoQ|Rectalcarcinoma registry

Background

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy is the recommended standard of care for patients with local advanced rectal cancer. However, it remains unclear, whether a prolonged time interval to surgery results in an increased perioperative morbidity, reduced TME quality or better pathological response. Aim of this study was to determine the time interval for best pathological response and perioperative outcome compared to current recommended interval of 6 to 8 weeks.

Methods

This is a retrospective analysis of the German StuDoQ|Rectalcarcinoma registry. Patients were grouped for the time intervals of “less than 6 weeks”, “6 to 8 weeks”, “8 to 10 weeks” and “more than 10 weeks”. Primary endpoint was pathological response, secondary endpoint TME quality and complications according to Clavien-Dindo classification.

Results

Due to our inclusion criteria (preoperative chemoradiation, surgery in curative intention, M0), 1.809 of 9.560 patients were suitable for analysis. We observed a trend for increased rates of pathological complete response (pCR: ypT0ypN0) and pathological good response (pGR: ypT0-1ypN0) for groups with a prolonged time interval which was not significant. Ultimately, it led to a steady state of pCR (16.5%) and pGR (22.6%) in “8 to 10” and “more than 10” weeks. We were not able to observe any differences between the subgroups in perioperative morbidity, proportion of rectal extirpation (for cancer of the lower third) or difference in TME quality.

Conclusion

A prolonged time interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiation can be performed, as the rate of pCR seems to be increased without influencing perioperative morbidity.

Individualized radiotherapy by combining high-end irradiation and magnetic resonance imaging

Image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) has been integrated into daily clinical routine and can today be considered the standard especially with high-dose radiotherapy. Currently imaging is based on MV- or kV-CT, which has clear limitations especially in soft-tissue contrast. Thus, combination of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and high-end radiotherapy opens a new horizon. The intricate technical properties of MR imagers pose a challenge to technology when combined with radiation technology. Several solutions that are almost ready for routine clinical application have been developed. The clinical questions include dose-escalation strategies, monitoring of changes during treatment as well as imaging without additional radiation exposure during treatment.

Consensus statement: the 16th Annual Western Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference; Saskatoon, Saskatchewan; September 5-6, 2014

The 16th annual Western Canadian Gastrointestinal Cancer Consensus Conference was held in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, September 4-5, 2014. The Consensus Conference is an interactive, multidisciplinary event attended by health care professionals from across western Canada (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba) involved in the care of gastrointestinal cancer. Surgical, medical, and radiation oncologists; pathologists; radiologists; and allied health care professionals participated in presentation and discussion sessions for the purposes of developing the recommendations presented here. This consensus statement addresses current issues in the management of colorectal cancer.

Advances in the management of colorectal cancer: from biology to treatment

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common malignant neoplasm worldwide and the fourth leading cause of cancer-related deaths. This article reviews the epidemiology, risk factors, pathogenesis, and prognosis of CRC with special emphasis on advances in the management of CRC over the past decade.

METHODS

A review of the published English literature was conducted using the search engines PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, and Google Scholar. A total of 127 relevant publications were identified for further review.

RESULTS

Most CRC are sporadic and are due to genetic instability and multiple somatic mutations. Approximately 80% of cancers are diagnosed at the early stage and are curable. The pathologic stage at presentation is the most important predictor of outcome after resection of early stage cancer. Surgery is the primary treatment modality for localized CRC. Advances in (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation have reduced the disease recurrence and increased survival in high risk diseases. Although recent advancements in combination chemotherapy and target agents have increased the survival of incurable CRC, it is remarkable that only selected patients with advanced CRC can be cured with multimodality therapy.

CONCLUSION

Over the past decade, there has seen substantial progress in our understanding of and in the management of CRC.

Optimizing adjuvant treatment decisions for stage t2 rectal cancer based on mesorectal node size: a decision analysis

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to optimize treatment decisions for patients with suspected stage T2 rectal cancer on the basis of mesorectal lymph node size at magnetic resonance imaging.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A decision-analytic model was developed to predict outcomes for patients with stage T2 rectal cancer at magnetic resonance imaging. Node-positive patients were assumed to benefit from chemoradiation prior to surgery. Imperfect magnetic resonance imaging performance for primary cancer and mesorectal nodal staging was incorporated. Five triage strategies were considered for administering preoperative chemoradiation: treat all patients; treat for any mesorectal node >3, >5, and >7 mm in size; and treat no patients. If nodal metastases or unsuspected stage T3 disease went untreated preoperatively, postoperative chemoradiation was needed, resulting in poorer outcomes. For each strategy, rates of acute and long-term chemoradiation toxicity and of 5-year local recurrence were computed. Effects of input parameter uncertainty were evaluated in sensitivity analysis.

RESULTS

The optimal strategy depended on the outcome prioritized. Acute and long-term chemoradiation toxicity rates were minimized by triaging only patients with nodes >7 mm to preoperative chemoradiation (18.9% and 10.8%, respectively). A treat-all strategy minimized the 5-year local recurrence rate (5.6%). A 7-mm nodal triage threshold increased the 5-year local recurrence rate to 8.0%; when no patients were treated preoperatively, the local recurrence rate was 10.1%. With improved primary tumor staging, all outcomes could be further optimized.

CONCLUSIONS

Mesorectal nodal size thresholds for preoperative chemoradiation should depend on the outcome prioritized: higher size thresholds reduce chemoradiation toxicity but increase recurrence rates. Improvements in nodal staging will have greater impact if primary tumor staging can be improved.

Multimodal treatment strategies for locally advanced rectal cancer

This review outlines the important multimodal treatment issues associated with locally advanced rectal cancer. Changes to chemotherapy and radiation schema, as well as modern surgical approaches, have led to a revolution in the management of this disease but the morbidity and mortality remains high. Adequate treatment is dependent on precise preoperative staging modalities. Advances in staging via endorectal ultrasound, computed tomography, MRI and PET have improved pretreatment triage and management. Important prognostic factors and their impact for this disease are under investigation. Here we discuss the different treatment options including modern tumor-related surgical approaches, neoadjuvant as well as adjuvant therapies. Further clinical progress will largely depend on the broader implementation of multidisciplinary treatment strategies following the principles of evidence-based medicine.

Colorectal cancer and 18FDG-PET/CT: What about adding the T to the N parameter in loco-regional staging?

AIM: To evaluate whether FDG-positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) may be an accurate technique in the assessment of the T stage in patients with colorectal cancer.

METHODS: Thirty four consecutive patients (20 men and 14 women; mean age: 63 years) with a histologically proven diagnosis of colorectal adenocarcinoma and scheduled for surgery in our hospital were enrolled in this study. All patients underwent FDG-PET/CT preoperatively. The primary tumor site and extent were evaluated on PET/CT images. Colorectal wall invasion was analysed according to a modified T classification that considers only three stages (≤ T2, T3, T4). Assessment of accuracy was carried out using 95% confidence intervals for T.

RESULTS: Thirty five/37 (94.6%) adenocarcinomas were identified and correctly located on PET/CT images. PET/CT correctly staged the T of 33/35 lesions identified showing an accuracy of 94.3% (95% CI: 87%-100%). All T1, T3 and T4 lesions were correctly staged, while two T2 neoplasms were overstated as T3.

CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that FDG-PET/CT may be an accurate modality for identifying primary tumor and defining its local extent in patients with colorectal cancer.

Management of stage IV rectal cancer: Palliative options

Approximately 30% of patients with rectal cancer present with metastatic disease. Many of these patients have symptoms of bleeding or obstruction. Several treatment options are available to deal with the various complications that may afflict these patients. Endorectal stenting, laser ablation, and operative resection are a few of the options available to the patient with a malignant large bowel obstruction. A thorough understanding of treatment options will ensure the patient is offered the most effective therapy with the least amount of associated morbidity. In this review, we describe various options for palliation of symptoms in patients with metastatic rectal cancer. Additionally, we briefly discuss treatment for asymptomatic patients with metastatic disease.

Endorectal ultrasound: its role in the diagnosis and treatment of rectal cancer

With development over the past 25 years of new surgical techniques and neoadjuvant therapy regimens for rectal cancer, physicians now have a range of treatment options that minimize morbidity and maximize the potential for cure. Accurate pretreatment staging is critical, ensuring adequate therapy and preventing overtreatment. Many options exist for staging primary rectal cancer. However, endorectal ultrasound (ERUS) remains the most attractive modality. It is an extension of the physical examination, and can be performed easily in the office. It is cost effective and is generally well tolerated by the patient, without need for general anesthesia. The authors discuss the data currently available on ERUS, including its accuracy and limitations, as well as the technical aspects of performing ERUS and interpreting the results. They also discuss new ultrasound technologies, which may improve rectal cancer staging in the future.

Role of tumor size in the pre-operative management of rectal cancer patients

Background

Clinical management of rectal cancer patients relies on pre-operative staging. Studies however continue to report moderate degrees of over/understaging as well as inter-observer variability. The aim of this study was to determine the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of tumor size for predicting T and N stages in pre-operatively untreated rectal cancers.

Methods

We examined a test cohort of 418 well-documented patients with pre-operatively untreated rectal cancer admitted to the University Hospital of Basel between 1987 and 1996. Classification and regression tree (CART) and logistic regression analysis were carried out to determine the ability of tumor size to discriminate between early (pT1-2) and late (pT3-4) T stages and between node-negative (pN0) and node-positive (pN1-2) patients. Results were validated by an external patient cohort (n = 28).

Results

A tumor diameter threshold of 34 mm was identified from the test cohort resulting in a sensitivity and specificity for late T stage of 76.3%, and 67.4%, respectively and an odds ratio (OR) of 6.67 (95%CI:3.4-12.9). At a threshold value of 29 mm, sensitivity and specificity for node-positive disease were 94% and 15.5%, respectively with an OR of 3.02 (95%CI:1.5-6.1). Applying these threshold values to the validation cohort, sensitivity and specificity for T stage were 73.7% and 77.8% and for N stage 50% and 75%, respectively.

Conclusions

Tumor size at a threshold value of 34 mm is a reproducible predictive factor for late T stage in rectal cancers. Tumor size may help to complement clinical staging and further optimize the pre-operative management of patients with rectal cancer.

How useful is rectal endosonography in the staging of rectal cancer?

It is essential in treating rectal cancer to have adequate preoperative imaging, as accurate staging can influence the management strategy, type of resection, and candidacy for neoadjuvant therapy. In the last twenty years, endorectal ultrasound (ERUS) has become the primary method for locoregional staging of rectal cancer. ERUS is the most accurate modality for assessing local depth of invasion of rectal carcinoma into the rectal wall layers (T stage). Lower accuracy for T2 tumors is commonly reported, which could lead to sonographic overstaging of T3 tumors following preoperative therapy. Unfortunately, ERUS is not as good for predicting nodal metastases as it is for tumor depth, which could be related to the unclear definition of nodal metastases. The use of multiple criteria might improve accuracy. Failure to evaluate nodal status could lead to inadequate surgical resection. ERUS can accurately distinguish early cancers from advanced ones, with a high detection rate of residual carcinoma in the rectal wall. ERUS is also useful for detection of local recurrence at the anastomosis site, which might require fine-needle aspiration of the tissue. Overstaging is more frequent than understaging, mostly due to inflammatory changes. Limitations of ERUS are operator and experience dependency, limited tolerance of patients, and limited range of depth of the transducer. The ERUS technique requires a learning curve for orientation and identification of images and planes. With sufficient time and effort, quality and accuracy of the ERUS procedure could be improved.

Endoscopic ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging for re-staging rectal cancer after radiotherapy

AIM: To compare the sensitivity and specificity of two imaging techniques, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), in patients with rectal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. And we compared EUS and MRI data with histological findings from surgical specimens.

METHODS: Thirty-nine consecutive patients (51.3% Male; mean age: 68.2 ± 8.9 years) with histologically confirmed distal rectal cancer were examined for staging. All patients underwent EUS and MRI imaging before and after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy.

RESULTS: After neoadjuvant chemoradiation, EUS and MRI correctly classified 46% (18/39) and 44% (17/39) of patients, respectively, in line with their histological T stage (P > 0.05). These proportions were higher for both techniques when nodal involvement was considered: 69% (27/39) and 62% (24/39). When patients were sorted into T and N subgroups, the diagnostic accuracy of EUS was better than MRI for patients with T0-T2 (44% vs 33%, P > 0.05) and N0 disease (87% vs 52%, P = 0.013). However, MRI was more accurate than EUS in T and N staging for patients with more advanced disease after radiotherapy, though these differences did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION: EUS and MRI are accurate imaging techniques for staging rectal cancer. However, after neoadjuvant RT-CT, the role of both methods in the assessment of residual rectal tumors remains uncertain.

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

AIM: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of pelvic phased-array magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and endorectal ultrasonography (ERUS) in the preoperative staging of rectal carcinoma.

METHODS: Thirty-four patients (15 males, 19 females) with ages ranging between 29 and 75 who have biopsy proven rectal tumor underwent both MRI and ERUS examinations before surgery. All patients were evaluated to determine the diagnostic accuracy of depth of transmural tumor invasion and lymph node metastases. Imaging results were correlated with histopathological findings regarded as the gold standard and both modalities were compared in terms of predicting preoperative local staging of rectal carcinoma.

RESULTS: The pathological T stage of the tumors was: pT1 in 1 patient, pT2 in 9 patients, pT3 in 21 patients and pT4 in 3 patients. The pathological N stage of the tumors was: pN0 in 19 patients, pN1 in 9 patients and pN2 in 6 patients. The accuracy of T staging for MRI was 89.70% (27 out of 34). The sensitivity was 79.41% and the specificity was 93.14%. The accuracy of T staging for ERUS was 85.29% (24 out of 34). The sensitivity was 70.59% and the specificity was 90.20%. Detection of lymph node metastases using phased-array MRI gave an accuracy of 74.50% (21 out of 34). The sensitivity and specificity was found to be 61.76% and 80.88%, respectively. By using ERUS in the detection of lymph node metastases, an accuracy of 76.47% (18 out of 34) was obtained. The sensitivity and specificity were found to be 52.94% and 84.31%, respectively.

CONCLUSION: ERUS and phased-array MRI are complementary methods in the accurate preoperative staging of rectal cancer. In conclusion, we can state that phased-array MRI was observed to be slightly superior in determining the depth of transmural invasion (T stage) and has same value in detecting lymph node metastases (N stage) as compared to ERUS.

Transrectal ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in the staging of rectal cancer. Effect of experience

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of experience on preoperative staging of rectal cancer using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

From January 2002 to May 2006, 134 consecutive patients with biopsy-proven rectal cancer were examined with a 1.5-Tesla MRI unit and TRUS using a 6.5-MHz transducer. An experienced gastrointestinal radiologist (R1) or a general radiologist (R2) performed the evaluations. All patients (78 M, 56 F, mean age 69.1 years, range 38-89) were treated with surgery alone. The mean size of the tumour was 4.0 cm (range 1.1-7.5). A complete postoperative histopathological examination was used as the gold standard.

RESULTS

At pathology, 42 of 134 (31%) tumours were classified as T1-T2 and 92 (69%) were classified as T3-T4. The TRUS sensitivity in rectal tumour T-staging was 93% for R1 and 75% for R2 (p<0. 01); specificity was 83% for R1 and 46% for R2 (p<0.05). The MRI sensitivity in rectal tumour T-staging was 96% for R1 and 77% for R2 (p<0. 05); the specificity was 74% for R1 and 40% for R2 (p<0.05). There was no difference in the results of N-staging between R1 and R2 for either TRUS or MRI.

CONCLUSION

Reader experience had a statistically significant positive effect on the preoperative prediction of tumour involvement of the rectal wall. To obtain high-quality preoperative prediction of rectal cancer T-stage, it is suggested that preoperative TRUS and MRI staging should be supervised by an expert in the colorectal cancer team. In addition to this supervision, the person responsible for staging should be trained through a defined training programme.

[MR-endoscopic US correlation for loco-regional staging of rectal carcinoma]

INTRODUCTION

To correlate findings at high-resolution MR and endoscopic US (EUS) for preoperative loco-regional staging of rectal carcinoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty-two patients with rectal carcinoma underwent high-resolution MR imaging. Only 43 of these patients underwent EUS due to technical limitations and stenosing carcinomas. Morphological imaging features and TNM staging were evaluated for both imaging modalities. The degree of correlation and accuracy were calculated for both.

RESULTS

The correlation between MR and EUS was good for tumor length and thickness (r=0.7 and 0.61) for for nodal (N) staging (k=0.53). Correlation was good for T1 and T2 stages (k=0.51) and T3 stage (k=0.43) and very poor for stage 4 (k= -0.09), because no T4 lesion was detected at EUS. 81.8% of patients where T stage was over-estimated on MRI and 100% of patients where T stage was over-estimated on EUS had received preoperative radiation therapy. Therefore, results should be interpreted with caution. The predictive evaluation of tumor resectability (absence of perirectal fascia invasion) with a circumferential margin on MR> or =5 mm was 93%.

CONCLUSION

Correlation between MR and EUS was moderate for T staging, because of limitations of EUS for large tumors. Results confirm that high-resolution MRI is useful for loco-regional staging of rectal carcinoma, especially for large tumors. EUS should be limited to the valuation of superficial tumors of the rectum.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation and local excision for T2-3 rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Local excision (LE) of T1 low-risk (G1-2/L0/V0) rectal cancer is an established approach with local recurrence (LR) rates of approximately 5%, whereas LE of > or = T2 high-risk tumors or inadequate resections (R1/RX/R < or = 1 mm) showed high recurrence rates. Because of the favorable results after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) and radical surgery of disease that completely responds (CR) with almost absent LR even of T3-4 tumors, an extension of the indication for LE is controversially discussed, and therefore, we assessed this therapeutic option.

METHODS

Including our own data, seven studies about LE after nCRT of cT2-3 tumors (n = 237) were analyzed after a PubMed search for cT categories, tumor height, nCRT regimens, schedule and technique of surgery, complications, freedom of stoma, response rates (ypT0-3), length of follow-up, LR, and metastases.

RESULTS

Subgroups that we formed (retrospective vs. prospective/retractor vs. transanal endoscopic microsurgery) showed differences in the distribution of cT categories. However, neither the studies we considered nor our own patients showed LR in CR (ypT0). In addition, patients with ypT1 tumor consistently showed low LR rates of 2% (range, 0%-6%), whereas in ypT2 findings, less favorable LR rates of 6% to 20% were observed, and disease that did not respond to therapy (ypT3) displayed LR rates in up to 42%.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite of a highly selected patient collective, an extended indication for LE of cT2-3 rectal cancer after nCRT may be considered. The strongest prognostic factors were a CR (ypT0) or responses on submucosa level (ypT1). These first results will have to be confirmed in a prospective trial with an appropriate sample size to ensure high statistical power.

Diagnostic precision of magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative prediction of the circumferential margin involvement in patients with rectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

Circumferential margin involvement (CMI) is an important prognostic indicator for patients with rectal cancer. This meta-analysis aims at evaluating the diagnostic precision of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the preoperative evaluation of CMI in patients with rectal cancer.

METHOD

Quantitative meta-analysis was performed comparing MRI against histology after total mesorectal excision. Sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were calculated for each study. Summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves and subgroup analysis were undertaken. Study quality and heterogeneity were evaluated. Meta-regression meta-analysis was used to evaluate the significance of the difference in relative DORs.

RESULTS

Nine studies evaluating 529 patients were included. Pooled results showed an overall sensitivity and specificity for MRI detecting CMI preoperatively of 94% and 85% respectively. The SROC analysis demonstrated an overall weighted area under the curve (AUC) of 0.92 (DOR 57.21, 95% CI 18.21-179.77), without significant heterogeneity between the studies (Q-value 14.66, P = 0.06). Good study quality further increased the sensitivity and specificity of MRI. The use of a 1.5 Tesla coil, a phased array coil and the inclusion of two interpreters also resulted in high preoperative diagnostic precision. Meta-regression meta-analysis showed a significant difference in the DOR for studies published in or since 2003 (P = 0.019).

CONCLUSION

Magnetic resonance imaging can accurately predict CMI preoperatively for rectal cancer in single units and this is reproducible across different centres. This strategy has important implications for selection of patients for adjuvant therapy prior to surgery.

Accurate staging, selective preoperative therapy and optimal surgery improves outcome in rectal cancer: a review of the recent evidence

OBJECTIVE

The current optimal management of locally advanced rectal cancer has evolved from surgical excision followed by postoperative therapy in patients with involved margins, to an increasing use of a preoperative strategy to 'down-stage and/or down-size' the tumour. This treatment strategy is based on the relationship of the tumour to the mesorectal fascia, the optimal surgical circumferential resection margin that can be achieved by total mesorectal excision. We have reviewed the recent evidence for this strategy.

METHOD

An electronic literature search using PubMed identified articles on the subject of rectal cancer between January 2000 and December 2005. The search was limited to English language publications with secondary references obtained from key articles. Articles published in high impact factor journals formed the basis of the review, together with articles related to national programmes on the management of rectal cancer. This does lead to a selection bias, particularly as the articles identified had a European bias.

CONCLUSION

The UK NHS Cancer Plan has outlined the basis for the multidisciplinary team (MDT) management of rectal cancer. Advances in preoperative assessment through accurate staging and the recognition of the importance of the relationship of the tumour to the mesorectal fascia has allowed the selection of patients for a preoperative strategy to down-size/down-stage the tumour if this fascial layer is involved or threatened. Improvements in the quality of surgical resection through the acceptance of the principle of total mesorectal excision have ensured that optimal surgery remains the cornerstone to successful treatment. Further refinements of the MDT process strive to improve outcome. Accurate radiological staging, optimal surgery and detailed histopathological assessment together with consideration of a preoperative neoadjuvant strategy should now form the basis for current treatment and future research in rectal cancer.

[External phased-array MR imaging preoperative assessment of rectal cancer]

The main problem associated with rectal cancer treatment is tumor recurrence. Randomized controlled studies have shown that adjuvant preoperative radiation therapy is effective for reducing local recurrence. These studies have also demonstrated that there are groups of rectal cancer patients with differing degrees of risk for local recurrence. At one end of the spectrum is the low-risk group: patients with superficial rectal cancer, who can be treated with surgery alone. At the other end is the high-risk group: patients with a close or involved resection margin at total mesorectal excision, the very advanced tumors that require a longer course of chemotherapy and radiation therapy, and extensive surgery. Paramount for this selection and differentiated treatment is a reliable preoperative test that can be used to distinguish these groups of patients. In this review article, we will discuss the role of high-resolution phased array MRI among the other imaging modalities such as endorectal MRI, endorectal US, and CT. We will also discuss and illustrate MR imaging results in terms of T stage, circumferential resection margin, locally advanced rectal cancer, and N stage.

Preoperative loco-regional imaging in rectal cancer

Preoperative staging of rectal cancer can influence the choice of surgery and the use of neoadjuvant therapy. This review evaluates the use of endorectal ultrasound (ERUS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the local staging of rectal cancer. Staging for distant metastases is beyond the scope of this review. A MEDLINE search for published work in English between 1984-2004 was carried out by entering the key words of ERUS, MRI and preoperative imaging and rectal cancer. Initially, 867 articles were retrieved. Abstracts were reviewed and papers selected according to the inclusion criteria of a minimum of 50 patients and papers published in English. Papers focusing on preoperative chemoradiotherapy and distal metastases were excluded. Thirty-one papers were included in the systematic review. The examination techniques and images obtained are discussed and the respective accuracy is reviewed. ERUS and MRI have complementary roles in the assessment of tumour depth. Ultrasound has an overall accuracy of 82% (T1, 2, 40-100%; T3, 4, 25-100%) and is particularly useful for early localized rectal cancers. MRI has an accuracy of 76% (T1, 2, 29-80%; T3, 4, 0-100%) and is useful in more advanced disease by providing clearer definition of the mesorectum and mesorectal fascia. Both methods have similar accuracy in the assessment of nodal metastases. Ultrasound is more operator dependent and accuracies improve with experience, but it is more portable and accessible than MRI. Improvements in technology and increased operator experience have led to more accurate preoperative staging. ERUS and MRI are complementary and are most accurate for early localized cancers and more advanced cancers, respectively.

Neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy for rectal cancer

The currently available evidence from randomized clinical trials clearly supports the use of adjuvant therapy in general and preoperative combined modality therapy in particular as effective means of decreasing the rates of local recurrence, improving sphincter preservation rates, and probably im-proving overall survival when managing patients with locally advanced adenocarcinomas of the lower two thirds of the rectum. A radical surgical approach with adequately performed, sharp TME remains the standard of care for those patients. There is clearly a need to develop and validate surrogate biomarkers for the identification of patients who respond favorably to preoperative treatment. There is still a significant fraction of rectal cancer patients who ultimately die from their disease. The armamentarium of avail-able therapies is evolving rapidly, and hopefully local control rates and overall survival of rectal cancer patients will continue to improve in the near future.

Preoperative staging of rectal cancer: the MERCURY research project

The development of a surgical technique that removes the tumour and all local draining nodes in an intact package, namely total mesorectal excision (TME) surgery, has provided the impetus for a more selective approach to the administration of preoperative therapy. One of the most important factors that governs the success of TME surgery is the relationship of tumour to the circumferential resection margin (CRM). Tumour involves the CRM in up to 20% of patients undergoing TME surgery, and results in both poor survival and local recurrence. It is therefore clear that the importance of the decision regarding the use of pre-operative therapy lies with the relationship of the tumour to the mesorectal fascia. In addition, a high-spatial-resolution MRI technique will identify tumours exhibiting other poor prognostic features, namely, extramural spread >5 mm, extramural venous invasion by tumour, nodal involvement, and peritoneal infiltration. The potential benefits of a selective approach using MRI-based selection criteria are evident. That is, over 50% of patients can be treated successfully with primary surgery alone without significant risk of local recurrence or systemic failure. Of the remainder, potentially dramatic improvements may be achieved through the use of intensive and targeted preoperative therapy aimed not only at reducing the size of the primary tumour and rendering potentially irresectable tumour resectable with tumour-free circumferential margins, but also at enabling patients at high risk of systemic failure to benefit from intensive combined modality therapy aimed at eliminating micrometastatic disease.

A technically difficult endorectal ultrasound is more likely to be inaccurate

OBJECTIVE

Endorectal ultrasound (ERUS) is well established as an accurate modality for local staging of rectal tumours. The aim of this study was to identify reasons for inaccurate staging of tumours, and to assess whether difficulties encountered during scanning are likely to influence accuracy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

ERUS was performed by a single operator using a 10 MHz rigid instrument. One hundred and seventeen patients that had both ERUS and surgery are included in this study (patients that had pre-operative radiotherapy were excluded). During ERUS, procedural conditions and limiting factors were recorded. Data was collected prospectively.

RESULTS

In 78 (66.7%) patients no technical difficulty was encountered during ERUS. In this group accuracy was 80% for T-stage and 77% for N-stage. Specific reasons for inaccuracy identified in this group were: inflammatory lymph nodes (from a tumour associated abscess and a colovesical fistula) and deep biopsy causing a submucosal defect with intramural haemorrhage in benign lesions (2 cases). In the remaining 39 (33.3%), the following problems were encountered: stenotic lesions (23), patient discomfort (8), poor bowel preparation (6), and scarring from previous surgery (2). In 11 patients from this group, the scan was considered inconclusive and no stage could be determined. For the other 28, the accuracy for T-stage was 68% and for N-stage 67%.

CONCLUSION

A technically difficult ERUS is likely to give an inconclusive or inaccurate result for both T-stage (P = 0.001) and N-stage (P = 0.003). In this situation a repeat scan may be considered (where appropriate). Alternatively, further assessment by MRI or flexible endoscopic ultrasound may be considered.

Techniques and trouble-shooting in high spatial resolution thin slice MRI for rectal cancer

MRI is increasingly advocated as an optimal method of staging rectal cancer. The technique enables depiction of the relationship of tumour to the mesorectal fascia and may thus identify tumours at risk of positive circumferential margin involvement at surgery. Depth of extramural spread may also be accurately measured and tumour deposits within the mesorectum are shown. It is important that a high spatial resolution technique is used in order to accurately depict these features and care should be taken in ensuring that images acquired cover the entire rectal tumour and mesorectum. This paper describes the technique of high spatial resolution rectal cancer imaging and the potential technical pitfalls in acquiring good quality images. Important factors to consider include: adequate scan duration to achieve high spatial resolution images with sufficient signal to noise ratio, careful positioning of the pelvic phased array coil, use of T2 weighted turbo spin-echo rather than T1 weighted imaging and careful planning of scans to ensure that images are obtained perpendicular to the rectal wall.

Comparison of CT and MRI in the pre-operative staging of rectal adenocarcinoma and prediction of circumferential resection margin involvement by MRI

OBJECTIVE

It has been suggested that MRI may be used as the sole modality of choice in pre-operative staging in rectal cancers. Knowledge of tumour stage and a threatened Circumferential Resection Margin (CRM) pre-operatively are essential for planning neo-adjuvant therapy and as predictors of local recurrence. At present most units utilize CT scanning to assess these parameters. The aim of our study was two fold: firstly to examine the accuracy of preop CT and MRI staging of rectal cancers compared with final histology and secondly to assess the accuracy of MRI in predicting penetration of the mesorectal envelope (ME).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients with biopsy proven rectal adenocarcinoma underwent thin slice MRI and CT scan pre-operatively. Forty-seven patients have been prospectively entered into the study: 24 male (median age 68 years; range 38-91 years). Eleven patients were unsuitable for surgery leaving 36 patients available for study.

RESULTS

CT correctly staged patients with T1/T2 rectal cancers more often than MRI (77% vs. 43%, P = 0.226). Patients with T1/T2 tumours were overstaged more often by MRI compared with CT (54% vs. 23%, P = 0.226). A greater proportion of patients with T3 tumours were correctly staged by MRI than CT (76% vs. 41%, P = 0.08); and more T3 disease was understaged by CT than MRI (54 vs. 18%, P = 0.032). CT and MRI staged T4 disease equally. In the assessment of mesorectal envelope integrity, MRI had a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 84%. The positive predictive value was 44% and the negative predictive value 96%.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest significant differences between accurate pre-operative "T" staging by CT and MRI for rectal cancer. MRI has the potential however, to accurately assess mesorectal envelope invasion. Further analysis is required to assess whether MRI can be used as the sole modality in pre-operative staging of rectal cancers.