Endoscopic ultrasonography for preoperative staging of esophageal carcinoma

Utility of dysphagia grade in predicting endoscopic ultrasound T-stage of non-metastatic esophageal cancer

Patients with non-metastatic esophageal cancer routinely undergo endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for loco-regional staging. Neoadjuvant therapy is recommended for ≥T3 tumors while upfront surgery can be considered for ≤T2 lesions. The aim of this study was to determine if the degree of dysphagia can predict the EUS T-stage of esophageal cancer. One hundred eleven consecutive patients with non-metastatic esophageal cancer were retrospectively reviewed from a database. Prior to EUS, patients' dysphagia grade was recorded. Correlation between dysphagia grade and EUS T-stage, especially in reference to predicting ≥T3 stage, was determined. The correlation of dysphagia grade with EUS T-stage (Kendall's tau coefficient) was 0.49 (P < 0.001) for the lower and 0.59 (P = 0.008) for the middle esophagus. The sensitivity and specificity of dysphagia grade ≥2 (can only swallow semi-solids/liquids) for T3 cancer were 56% (95% confidence interval [CI] 43-67%) and 93% (95% CI 79-98%), respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value of dysphagia grade ≥3 (can only swallow liquids or total dysphagia) for T3 lesions were 36% (95% CI 25-48%), 100% (95% CI 89-100%), and 100% (95% CI 83-100%), respectively. Overall, there was a significant positive correlation between dysphagia grade and the EUS T-stage of esophageal cancer. All patients with dysphagia grade ≥3 had T3 lesions. This may have clinical implications for patients who can only swallow liquids or have complete dysphagia by allowing for prompt initiation of neoadjuvant therapy, especially in countries/centers where EUS service is difficult to access in a timely manner or not available.

Endoscopic Ultrasound for Preoperative Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: a Meta-Analysis

Background

Treatment options and prognosis of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) depend on the primary tumor depth (T-staging) and regional lymph node status (N-staging). Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has emerged as a useful staging tool, but studies regarding its benefits have been variable. The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of EUS for detecting preoperative ESCC.

Methods

We included in our meta-analysis studies involving EUS-based staging of preoperative ESCC compared with pathological staging. Using a random-effects model, we performed a meta-analysis of the accuracy of EUS by calculating pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity and the diagnostic odds ratio. In addition, we created a summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve.

Results

Forty-four studies (n = 2880) met the inclusion criteria. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of T1 were 77% (95%CI: 73 to 80) and 95% (95%CI: 94 to 96). Among the T1 patients, EUS had a pooled sensitivity in differentiating T1a and T1b of 84% (95%CI: 80 to 88) and 83% (95%CI: 80 to 86), and a specificity of 91% (95%CI: 88 to 94) and 89% (95%CI: 86 to 92). To stage T4, EUS had a pooled sensitivity of 84% (95%CI: 79 to 89) and a specificity of 96% (95%CI: 95 to 97). The overall accuracy of EUS for T-staging was 79% (95%CI: 77 to 80), and for N-staging, 71% (95%CI: 69 to 73).

Conclusions

EUS has good diagnostic accuracy for staging ESCC, which has better performance in T1 sub-staging (T1a and T1b) and advanced disease (T4).

Role of F18-FDG PET/CT in the Staging and Restaging of Esophageal Cancer: A Comparison with CECT

Esophageal cancer is one of the most fatal cancers principally because of its late presentation. CECT plays an important role in the staging of esophageal cancer but has some limitations. PET/CT which provides physiological information along with anatomical information and is a whole body imaging technique may therefore be a better alternative and thereby can facilitate selection or exclusion of patients for resection. The aim was to evaluate the performance of F18 FDG PET/CT in the staging and restaging of esophageal carcinoma compared to CECT using histopathologic findings and clinical follow-up as gold standard. Twenty eight patients with proven esophageal carcinoma, both preoperative and postoperative, were studied with CECT and F18 FDG PET/CT scan within an interval of 2 weeks. The PET/CT scan was acquired after injection of 370 MBq (10 mCi) F18-FDG and was evaluated for areas of increased focal uptake. CECT scan of chest and abdomen was done after injection of iodinated non-ionic contrast media. CECT findings suggested stage-IV disease in 16/28 (57.14%) patients and non stage-IV disease in 12/28 (42.86%) patients, whereas PET/CT suggested stage-IV disease in 23/28 (82.14%) patients and non stage-IV disease in 5/28 (17.86%) patients. Total nine patients were upstaged by PET/CT compared to CECT, out of which 7 (25%) were correctly upstaged and 2 (7.14%) were falsely upstaged. PET/CT improved our ability to detect distant metastases in 25% of patients that was missed by CECT. So, the use of F18 FDG PET/CT in esophageal cancer can alter management in significant number of patients.

Lymph node staging in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a comparative study of endoscopic ultrasonography versus computed tomography

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is established as a standard approach for locoregional staging of esophageal cancer. However, only a few published studies have attempted to correlate the station of the abnormal lymph nodes detected by EUS with the definitive histology. We compared EUS and computed tomography (CT) in the initial staging of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with esophageal cancer undergoing EUS were evaluated. EUS findings and patient data including histopatology were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively. Lymph node locations were divided into three groups; abdominal (A), paraesophageal (B), and thoracic paratracheal (C).

RESULTS

A total of 365 consecutive patients underwent EUS and 159 patients underwent esophagectomy without neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Thirty-eight patients were excluded (insufficient EUS, etc.), and 121 patients were enrolled. The overall accuracy of EUS was 64% (sensitivity 68%, specificity 58%, positive predictive value [PPV] 68%), CT was 51% (sensitivity 33%, specificity 75%, PPV 64%), and CT + EUS was 64% (sensitivity 74%, specificity 50%, PPV 66%). The accuracy of EUS was higher than CT in Groups A and C. Sensitivity of CT was lower than that of EUS alone and CT + EUS.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has demonstrated that EUS is a more accurate technique than contrast-enhanced CT for detecting abnormal lymph nodes. Sensitivity of CT was lower than that of EUS alone and CT + EUS. But some metastatic lymph nodes in neck and abdominal fields are only detectable by CT. Therefore, both EUS and CT should be undertaken for routine examination prior to treatment of esophageal cancer.

Staging accuracy of esophageal cancer by endoscopic ultrasound: A meta-analysis and systematic review

AIM: To evaluate the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in the staging of esophageal cancer.

METHODS: Only EUS studies confirmed by surgery were selected. Articles were searched in Medline and Pubmed. Two reviewers independently searched and extracted data. Meta-analysis of the accuracy of EUS was analyzed by calculating pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, and diagnostic odds ratio. Pooling was conducted by both the Mantel-Haenszel method (fixed effects model) and DerSimonian Laird method (random effects model). The heterogeneity of studies was tested using Cochran’s Q test based upon inverse variance weights.

RESULTS: Forty-nine studies (n = 2558) which met the inclusion criteria were included in this analysis. Pooled sensitivity and specificity of EUS to diagnose T1 was 81.6% (95% CI: 77.8-84.9) and 99.4% (95% CI: 99.0-99.7), respectively. To diagnose T4, EUS had a pooled sensitivity of 92.4% (95% CI: 89.2-95.0) and specificity of 97.4% (95% CI: 96.6-98.0). With Fine Needle Aspiration (FNA), sensitivity of EUS to diagnose N stage improved from 84.7% (95% CI: 82.9-86.4) to 96.7% (95% CI: 92.4-98.9). The P value for the χ² test of heterogeneity for all pooled estimates was > 0.10.

CONCLUSION: EUS has excellent sensitivity and specificity in accurately diagnosing the TN stage of esophageal cancer. EUS performs better with advanced (T4) than early (T1) disease. FNA substantially improves the sensitivity and specificity of EUS in evaluating N stage disease. EUS should be strongly considered for staging esophageal cancer.

Impact of hybrid fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/computed tomography on radiotherapy planning in esophageal and non–small-cell lung cancer

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of a hybrid fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT) scanner in radiotherapy planning for esophageal and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 30 patients (16 with esophageal cancer, 14 with NSCLC) underwent an FDG-PET/CT for radiotherapy planning purposes. Noncontrast total-body spiral CT scans were obtained first, followed immediately by FDG-PET imaging which was automatically co-registered to the CT scan. A physician not involved in the patients' original treatment planning designed a gross tumor volume (GTV) based first on the CT dataset alone, while blinded to the FDG-PET dataset. Afterward, the physician designed a GTV based on the fused PET/CT dataset. To standardize PET GTV margin definition, background liver PET activity was standardized in all images. The CT-based and PET/CT-based GTVs were then quantitatively compared by way of an index of conformality, which is the ratio of the intersection of the two GTVs to their union.

RESULTS

The mean index of conformality was 0.44 (range, 0.00-0.70) for patients with NSCLC and 0.46 (range, 0.13-0.80) for patients with esophageal cancer. In 10 of the 16 (62.5%) esophageal cancer patients, and in 12 of the 14 (85.7%) NSCLC patients, the addition of the FDG-PET data led to the definition of a smaller GTV.

CONCLUSION

The incorporation of a hybrid FDG-PET/CT scanner had an impact on the radiotherapy planning of esophageal cancer and NSCLC. In future studies, we recommend adoption of a conformality index for a more comprehensive comparison of newer treatment planning imaging modalities to conventional options.

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.

EUS staging of upper GI malignancies: results of a prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Electronic 270 degrees transverse-array EUS (TA-EUS) provides high-quality cross-sectional images but cannot guide FNA. Linear EUS (L-EUS) provides longitudinal images of malignancies and the ability to guide FNA.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a prospective randomized comparison of TA-EUS and L-EUS for the staging of upper-GI (UGI) malignancies.

DESIGN

Forty-three patients underwent L-EUS immediately followed by TA-EUS (N = 27, 63%) or TA-EUS immediately followed by L-EUS (N = 16, 37%).

PATIENTS

Forty-three subjects (mean age, 64 years; 37 men) with an UGI malignancy (4 stomach and 38 esophageal) were evaluated with both TA-EUS and L-EUS.

INTERVENTIONS

Abnormal lymph nodes were sampled by FNA for cytology.

RESULTS

There was agreement on the T stage by linear and radial techniques in 38 of 43 subjects (88%). Twenty-seven of 43 patients (63%) had abnormal lymph nodes by linear or transverse-array imaging. L-EUS demonstrated 66 abnormal lymph nodes in 27 subjects (average of 2.4 nodes/subject). TA-EUS demonstrated 90 abnormal lymph nodes in 27 subjects (average of 3.3 nodes/subject, P = .009, compared with L-EUS). In 16 of the 27 subjects, an FNA was performed, which was positive in 13 cases (81%) and negative in 3 cases (10%) for malignancy.

CONCLUSIONS

TA-EUS and L-EUS provide similar results of T staging of UGI malignancies. However, the number of abnormal lymph nodes detected by TA-EUS was more than by L-EUS. These findings suggest that radial or transverse-array EUS imaging should be the primary method for staging of UGI malignancies.

Practice patterns and attitudes toward the role of endoscopic ultrasound in staging of gastrointestinal malignancies: a survey of physicians and surgeons

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

It is unknown how physician specialties other than gastroenterologists that manage gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies utilize endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in their practices. The aim of this study was to (i) assess the proportion of gastroenterologists, oncologists, and surgeons that utilize EUS for staging of GI malignancies; (ii) assess the general availability of EUS; and (iii) determine which factors are associated with the use and availability of EUS.

METHODS

A self-administered questionnaire was mailed out to 1,200 randomly selected gastroenterologists, oncologists, and surgeons throughout the United States.

RESULTS

The data was analyzed from 521 (43%) responses. There were 60% respondents who had EUS available within their practices. There was greater availability of EUS within the practices of surgeons (81%; p < 0.001), within academic practices (87%; p= < 0.001), and in practices that serve a population >500,000 (p < 0.001). The majority of respondents (71%) utilized EUS in their practices. There was a similar utilization of EUS across specialties (p= NS). There was greater utilization of EUS in academic centers (82%; p < 0.001), in practices that served a community of >500,000 (p= 0.003), and among respondents who had been in practice for less than 5 yr (p= 0.005). Employing logistic regression models for utilization of EUS, lesser number of years in practice, and availability of EUS were found to be the only significant predictors of utilization.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of practitioners utilized EUS in management of GI malignancies. There was similar utilization of EUS across specialties. EUS is available to the majority of practitioners who manage GI malignancies.

Endoscopic ultrasound for preoperative staging of esophageal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is potentially the best method for pretreatment staging of esophageal carcinoma once distant metastases have been excluded by other methods. However, its apparent accuracy might be influenced by the use of neoadjuvant therapy. To determine the accuracy of EUS in patients undergoing esophageal resection, the authors reviewed their experience with EUS.

METHODS

A total of 73 patients with esophageal carcinoma who underwent an esophagectomy between April 2000 and February 2005 were examined using preoperative EUS and computed tomography (CT). Of these patients, 39 also underwent preoperative neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Both EUS and CT scan were used to determine the depth of tumor penetration (T-stage) and the presence of lymph node metastases (N-stage). These results then were compared with staging determined after pathologic examination of the resected surgical specimen.

RESULTS

For patients not undergoing neoadjuvant therapy, T-stage was accurately determined by EUS in 79%, N-stage in 74%, and tumor node metastasis (TNM) classification in 65% of the cases. However, when patients who had undergone neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were included, the overall accuracy of EUS was 64% for T-stage, 63% for N-stage, and 53% for TNM classification. For the patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy, EUS indicated a more advanced T-stage in 49%, N-stage in 38%, and TNM classification in 51% of the cases, as compared with pathology. The overall accuracy of EUS for T- and N-stage carcinomas was superior to that of CT scanning.

CONCLUSION

For patients who do not undergo preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy, EUS is a more accurate method for determining T- and N-stage resected esophageal carcinomas. Neoadjuvant therapy, however, results in apparent overstaging, predominantly because of tumor downstaging, and this reduces the apparent accuracy of EUS (and CT scanning) in this patient group. Nevertheless, EUS staging before neoadjuvant therapy could be more accurate than pathologic staging after treatment, thereby providing better initial staging information, which can be used to facilitate treatment.

Esophageal Carcinoma: Current Controversial Topics

Worldwide, esophageal carcinoma is a common gastrointestinal cancer with a high mortality. The incidence of adenocarcinoma of the esophagus is increasing in the western world, but squamous cell carcinoma remains dominant in the underdeveloped parts of the world. Both types of esophageal carcinoma remain equally virulent. Currently, there are no optimal preventative screening programs available and most patients present with advanced or metastatic disease. Although many options are available for improving diagnostic accuracy, a single method has not displayed significant advantages over the others. In addition, selecting a superior treatment regimen has not surfaced. Preferred resection techniques exist, but one method has not illustrated improvements in survival over the others. A lack of improved survival rates with single modality therapies has led to a multi modality approach. However, developments in neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies have led to mixed conclusions. Collectively, past studies have not shown an optimal neoadjuvant or adjuvant regimen in terms of survival benefit. This review highlights existing staging modalities and treatment regimens for esophageal carcinoma, in an effort to illustrate the controversial nature surrounding its management.

Preoperative TN staging of esophageal cancer: Comparison of miniprobe ultrasonography, spiral CT and MRI

AIM: To evaluate the value of miniprobe sonography (MPS), spiral CT and MR imaging (MRI) in the tumor and regional lymph node staging of esophageal cancer.

METHODS: Eight-six patients (56 men and 30 women; age range of 39-73 years, mean 62 years) with esophageal carcinoma were staged preoperatively with imaging modalities. Of them, 81 (94%) had squamous cell carcinoma, 4 (5%) adenocarcinoma, and 1 (1%) adenoacanthoma. Eleven patients (12%) had malignancy of the upper one third, 41 (48%) of the mid-esophagus and 34 (40%) of the distal one third. Forty-one were examined by spiral CT in whom 13 were co-examined by MPS, and forty-five by MRI in whom 18 were also co-examined by MPS. These imaging results were compared with the findings of the histopathologic examination for resected specimens.

RESULTS: In staging the depth of tumor growth, MPS was significantly more accurate (84%) than spiral CT and MRI (68% and 60%, respectively, P < 0.05). The specificity and sensitivity were 82% and 85% for MPS; 60% and 69% for spiral CT; and 40% and 63% for MRI, respectively. In staging regional lymph nodes, spiral CT was more accurate (78%) than MPS and MRI (71% and 64%, respectively), but the difference was not statistically significant. The specificity and sensitivity were 79% and 77% for spiral CT; 75% and 68% for MPS; and 68% and 62% for MRI, respectively.

CONCLUSION: MPS is superior to spiral CT or MRI for T staging, especially in early esophageal cancer. However, the three modalities have the similar accuracy in N staging. Spiral CT or MRI is helpful for the detection of far-distance metastasis in esophageal cancer.

Multimodality therapy for esophageal cancer

Esophageal cancer is undergoing a major shift in its epidemiology. Its incidence is dramatically growing and it more commonly affects younger and healthier patients. Based on the published data, there is no strong evidence to recommend routine preoperative chemotherapy for the treatment of surgically resectable esophageal carcinoma. It might be that a large-scale randomized study-which will be published in the near future-will shed some different light on this subject. The role of preoperative CRT remains undetermined. To settle this issue, larger, clinical, controlled trials are needed. Improvement in the preoperative regimen and use of new drugs should be evaluated. Concomitant CRT should be considered for potential benefit in survival and local control in patients who have localized disease and are candidates for radical non-surgical treatment. Patients with pCR following neoadjuvant therapy have a consistent, substantial survival benefit. Biologic markers can be used to predict response to therapy and might allow designation of treatment based on the individual tumor. Pretreatment staging is necessary for standardization of patients undergoing treatment protocols and for outcome evaluation. Pretreatment staging will be even more important in the future for adjusting treatment to individual patient. Video-assisted thoracoscopy and laparoscopy have been found to be the most accurate lymph node staging techniques.

Distant metastases from cervical esophagus cancer

Cancer of the cervical esophagus has a poor prognosis in relation to stage. Correct staging is thus essential in order to establish the prognosis and the treatment program. Distant metastases can involve the lymph nodes (mediastinal and celiac lymph nodes) or they can be extranodal visceral types. Correct lymph node staging can be performed with esophageal endoscopic ultrasonography, computed tomography (CT) scan and, currently, with positron emission tomography (PET) and minimally invasive surgery. For hematogenous metastases, CT scan and PET are mainly used, as well as minimally invasive surgery, with the eventual aid of intraoperative ultrasonography.

Does neoadjuvant chemoradiation downstage esophageal carcinoma?

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy is administered to patients with esophageal carcinoma with the belief that this will both downstage the tumor and improve survival. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is currently the most accurate method of staging esophageal cancer for tumor (T) and lymph node (N) status. Because both EUS and neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal carcinoma are relatively new, there are few data examining the relationship between EUS stage and histological stage (the stage after resection) in patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy.

METHODS

To determine the effect of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy on T and N stage as determined by EUS, we retrospectively compared two groups of patients with esophageal cancer staged by EUS. One group (33 patients) underwent neoadjuvant therapy (Walsh protocol: 5-fluorouracil, cisplatin, and 4000 rads of external beam radiation) followed by resection. The second group (22 patients), a control group, underwent resection without neoadjuvant therapy. We then compared histological stage to determine if there was a downstaging in the patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy. Survival was evaluated as well.

RESULTS

EUS accurately predicted histologic stage. In the control group EUS overestimated T stage in 3 of 22 (13%), underestimated N stage in 2 of 22 (9%), and overestimated N stage in 2 of 22 (9%) of patients. Preoperative radiochemotherapy downstaged (preoperative EUS stage versus pathologic specimen) 12 of 33 (36%) of patients whereas only 1 of 22 (5%) of patients in the control group was downstaged. Complete response (no tumor found in the surgical specimen) was observed in 5 of 33 (15%) of patients receiving radiochemotherapy. Survival was prolonged significantly in patients receiving radiochemotherapy: 20.6 months versus 9.6 months for those (stage II or III) patients not receiving radiochemotherapy (P <0.01). Operative time, operative blood loss, and length of stay were not significantly different between groups. Perioperative mortality was higher in the radiochemotherapy group (13%) compared with the no radiochemotherapy group (5%) but did not achieve statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS accurately stages esophageal carcinoma. Neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy downstages esophageal carcinoma for T and N status. In our nonrandomized study, neoadjuvant therapy conferred a significant survival advantage. Operative risk appears to be increased in patients receiving neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy prior to esophagectomy.

Histopathologic validation of lymph node staging with FDG-PET scan in cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction: A prospective study based on primary surgery with extensive lymphadenectomy

OBJECTIVE

To assess the value of positron emission tomography with 18fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG-PET) for preoperative lymph node staging of patients with primary cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

FDG-PET appears to be a promising tool in the preoperative staging of cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction. Recent reports indicate a higher sensitivity and specificity for detection of stage IV disease and a higher specificity for diagnosis of lymph node involvement compared with the standard use of computed tomography and endoscopic ultrasound.

METHODS

Forty-two patients entered the prospective study. All underwent attenuation-corrected FDG-PET imaging of the neck, thorax, and upper abdomen, a spiral computed tomography scan, and an endoscopic ultrasound. The gold standard consisted exclusively of the histology of sampled nodes obtained by extensive two-field or three-field lymphadenectomies (n = 39) or from guided biopsies of suspicious distant nodes indicated by imaging (n = 3).

RESULTS

The FDG-PET scan had lower accuracy for the diagnosis of locoregional nodes (N1-2) than combined computed tomography and endoscopic ultrasound (48% vs. 69%) because of a significant lack of sensitivity (22% vs. 83%). The accuracy for distant nodal metastasis (M+Ly), however, was significantly higher for FDG-PET than the combined use of computed tomography and endoscopic ultrasound (86% vs. 62%). Sensitivity was not significantly different, but specificity was greater (90% vs. 69%). The FDG-PET scan correctly upstaged five patients (12%) from N1-2 stage to M+Ly stage. One patient was falsely downstaged by FDG-PET scanning.

CONCLUSIONS

FDG-PET scanning improves the clinical staging of lymph node involvement based on the increased detection of distant nodal metastases and on the superior specificity compared with conventional imaging modalities.

Esophageal cancer: a systematic review

Carcinoma of the esophagus has one of the lowest possibilities of cure, with 5-year survival rates estimated to be approximately 10% overall; these rates are second only to hepatobiliary and pancreatic cancers. This fact and the rapid increase in the incidence of adenocarcinomas of the esophagus in recent years challenges us to identify areas of improvement for all aspects of this disease. We discuss potential reasons for the increase in the incidence of adenocarcinomas, evidence that defines the similarity between tumors of the gastroesophageal junction and the tubular esophagus, and other prognostic factors that may influence future modifications of our staging classification of this disease. Surgical advances have translated into improvements in surgical morbidity and mortality rates. Current therapeutic options and the relative merits of the options are discussed. Improvements in patient outcome most likely hinge on earlier diagnosis, more accurate staging, and the optimal use of combined modalities, coupled with technical advances in the modalities. A systematic review approach was undertaken to evaluate the performance characteristics of newer staging tools and the value of different combined modality approaches with particular focus on the use of those approaches for patients with potentially curable disease. A similar methodologic approach was used to address the utility of the many strategies currently used in practice for the palliation of esophageal tumors, with particular focus on the relief of malignant dysphagia. Finally, a summary of published guidelines and population-based patterns of care are presented. This serves as an overview of how all of this evidence actually translates into the care we are providing. A coordinated international effort in population-based research and randomized controlled trials would be the cornerstone to future advances in this relatively uncommon but devastating disease.

Endosonographic staging of 100 consecutive patients with esophageal carcinoma: introduction of the 8-mm esophagoprobe

Endoscopic ultrasound of esophageal carcinoma is conventionally performed using the 13-mm fiberoptic/ultrasound echoendoscope. However, the large diameter results in an inability to negotiate the primary tumor in 25% of patients. The aim of this study was first to determine whether use of the 8-mm esophagoprobe would overcome this problem and second to evaluate the accuracy of the smaller diameter instrument. One hundred consecutive patients with esophageal cancer underwent initial gastroscopy. Based upon the degree of luminal stenosis, patients were staged with either the conventional echoendoscope (luminal diameter > or = 15 mm) or the esophagoprobe (luminal diameter < 15 mm). The primary tumor was successfully negotiated in all subjects (echoendoscope 30, esophagoprobe 70) so that T- and N-staging was accomplished in every patient. Esophageal dilatation was performed in 12 patients (12%). The procedure was well tolerated and there were no complications, in particular no patient suffered esophageal perforation. The accuracy of the esophagoprobe for T-staging was 90% (19 out of 20) and that for N-staging was 75% (15 out of 20). This was similar to the accuracy of staging with the conventional echoendoscope, 90% (9 out of 10) for T-stage and 90% (9 out of 10) for N-stage. The esophagoprobe can safely and accurately stage patients with esophageal carcinoma, including those with high-grade stenoses.

Do we practice what we preach? clinical decision making and utilization of endoscopic ultrasound for staging esophageal cancer

OBJECTIVES

Endosonography is accurate for staging esophageal cancer. However, whether detailed staging impacts clinical decision making, whether endosonography is perceived as a useful modality, and what factors influence the utilization of endosonography have not been studied.

METHODS

One hundred gastroenterologists were surveyed about staging and management of esophageal cancer, including: 1) management by stage; 2) perceived usefulness of endosonography; 3) availability of endosonography; and 4) number of patients referred.

RESULTS

Clinical decisions varied by incremental differences in tumor stage. However, only 27 of 66 respondents (40.9%) judged endosonography to be very useful or essential for the evaluation of esophageal cancer and only 22 (33.3%) had referred a patient. Perceived usefulness and availability were independent factors strongly associated with referral for endosonography. Among 18 respondents to whom endosonography was available and who considered it useful, 14 (77.9%) had referred a case. In contrast, a conservative management was not associated with either perceived usefulness of or referral for endosonography.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians recognize the importance of detailed staging for management of esophageal cancer. Despite this, they underestimate the utility of endosonography and fail to refer patients for appropriate evaluation. Lack of perceived usefulness and unavailability are important independent barriers to utilization of endosonography in clinical practice.

Endosonographic Staging of Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND: Endosonography (ES) is an important tool for staging malignant esophageal cancer with the TNM staging classification. ES is a safe procedure and an accurate method of staging tumor invasion (T) and lymph node involvement (N). METHODS: The author reviewed the literature on the comparative roles of computed tomography and ES as complementary staging procedures. RESULTS: Advantages of ES in staging esophageal cancer include the ability to accurately determine the layer depth of mural infiltration and to detect metastatic involvement of regional lymph nodes. Its disadvantages include its inability to identify distant metastases, to differentiate inflammation from malignant infiltration of wall layers or in lymph nodes, and to examine beyond obstructing tumors unless esophageal dilation is performed. A recent review indicates the accuracy for T staging to be 84% and N staging to be 77%. CONCLUSIONS: ES is a valuable tool in staging esophageal cancer and should be used in combination with computed tomography for highest accuracy.

Esophageal carcinoma. Ex vivo endoluminal magnetic resonance imaging

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

The authors evaluate ex vivo the role of endoluminal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the tumor and regional lymph node staging of esophageal carcinoma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Nine esophagus specimens with carcinoma (seven adenocarcinoma, two squamous cell carcinoma) were studied directly after resection. Tumor (T) and regional lymph nodes (N) were classified, and the results were compared to histopathology.

RESULTS

T classification with endoluminal MRI was correct in eight of the nine tumors. One Tis tumor was staged as T1 tumor because of submucosal edema. MRI detected 35 of 91 lymph nodes. Of these 35 nodes, 14 were true-positives, 5 were false-positives, 1 was a false-negative, and 15 were true-negatives. The majority of the 56 missed lymph nodes were outside the field of view, including two specimens with a tight stricture. These lymph nodes included seven nodes with metastatic involvement. TN classification was correct in six specimens (67%).

CONCLUSION

This ex vivo pilot study demonstrates that T classification of esophageal carcinoma using endoluminal MRI is feasible. The results of lymph node classification are less favorable, predominantly because of the limited field of view.