Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2001 Feb;53(2):182-8.
doi: 10.1067/mge.2001.111776.

The accuracy of EUS and helical CT in the assessment of vascular invasion by peripapillary malignancy

W M Tierney  1 , I R Francis, F Eckhauser, G Elta, T T Nostrant, J M Scheiman
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

The accuracy of EUS and helical CT in the assessment of vascular invasion by peripapillary malignancy

W M Tierney et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001 Feb.

Abstract

Background: The relative accuracy of helical CT and EUS for defining the local resectability of peripapillary malignancies is undefined.

Methods: Fifty-one patients with a peripapillary malignancy and no metastatic disease were prospectively evaluated with helical CT and EUS. Imaging results were compared with surgical staging, and a tumor was defined as resectable when there was no macroscopic or microscopic residual tumor.

Results: Nine patients had surgically confirmed locally unresectable disease, which was accurately predicted by EUS in 6 patients (sensitivity 67%) and by helical CT in 3 patients (sensitivity 33%; p = 0.35). When only patients with complete EUS examinations were included, the sensitivities of EUS and helical CT for vascular invasion were 100% and 33% (p = 0.06), respectively. When all patients not undergoing surgery because of imaging evidence of locally unresectable disease were included, the sensitivities were 100% and 62.5% (p = 0.02), respectively. One of 15 patients with a tumor amenable to surgical resection was labeled as unresectable by EUS but subsequently had a local recurrence of the tumor. The specificities of EUS (93%) and helical CT (100%) were similar.

Conclusion: EUS is more sensitive than helical CT for detecting vascular invasion by peripapillary malignancies and should be added to staging protocols, particularly when findings on helical CT are equivocal.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

MeSH terms