Value of helical computed tomography, angiography, and endoscopic ultrasound in determining resectability of periampullary carcinoma
- PMID: 9324129
- DOI: 10.1016/s0002-9610(97)00132-3
Value of helical computed tomography, angiography, and endoscopic ultrasound in determining resectability of periampullary carcinoma
Abstract
Background: High-quality preoperative radiographic evaluation is crucial in selecting patients with periampullary carcinomas who are candidates for surgical exploration and tumor resection while minimizing the rate of unnecessary laparotomy.
Methods: Twenty-one consecutive patients were prospectively investigated using helical computed tomography (CT) scanning, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), and selective visceral angiography (SVA) to determine tumor resectability. All patients were explored and resectability determined.
Results: Helical CT had a sensitivity of 63%, a specificity of 100%, and an overall accuracy of 86%. EUS had a sensitivity of 75%, a specificity of 77%, and an overall accuracy of 76%. SVA had a sensitivity of 38%, a specificity of 92%, and an overall accuracy of 71%.
Conclusions: Helical CT scanning is the best preoperative imaging test to determine tumor resectability. EUS is more sensitive than CT for tumor detection, but underestimates resectability. SVA is no longer helpful in the preoperative evaluation of these malignancies.
Similar articles
-
Preoperative staging and tumor resectability assessment of pancreatic cancer: prospective study comparing endoscopic ultrasonography, helical computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and angiography.Am J Gastroenterol. 2004 Mar;99(3):492-501. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2004.04087.x. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004. PMID: 15056091
-
Ultrafast magnetic resonance imaging improves the staging of pancreatic tumors.Ann Surg. 1997 Oct;226(4):393-405; discussion 405-7. doi: 10.1097/00000658-199710000-00001. Ann Surg. 1997. PMID: 9351708 Free PMC article.
-
Is a preoperative multidiagnostic approach to predict surgical resectability of periampullary tumors still effective?Am J Surg. 2001 Sep;182(3):243-9. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9610(01)00707-3. Am J Surg. 2001. PMID: 11587685
-
Pretherapeutic evaluation of patients with upper gastrointestinal tract cancer using endoscopic and laparoscopic ultrasonography.Dan Med J. 2012 Dec;59(12):B4568. Dan Med J. 2012. PMID: 23290296 Review.
-
Endoscopic ultrasound versus computed tomography in determining the resectability of pancreatic cancer: A diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis.Saudi J Gastroenterol. 2020 May-Jun;26(3):113-119. doi: 10.4103/sjg.SJG_39_20. Saudi J Gastroenterol. 2020. PMID: 32436866 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Multimodality imaging of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a review of the literature.HPB (Oxford). 2012 Oct;14(10):658-68. doi: 10.1111/j.1477-2574.2012.00508.x. Epub 2012 Jun 14. HPB (Oxford). 2012. PMID: 22954001 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Imaging for the diagnosis and staging of periampullary carcinomas.Surg Endosc. 2003 Oct;17(10):1514-20. doi: 10.1007/s00464-002-8752-7. Epub 2003 Aug 15. Surg Endosc. 2003. PMID: 12915975 Review.
-
The investigation of unexplained biliary dilatation.Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2009 Apr;11(2):155-9. doi: 10.1007/s11894-009-0024-4. Curr Gastroenterol Rep. 2009. PMID: 19281704 Review.
-
Diagnostic accuracy of different imaging modalities following computed tomography (CT) scanning for assessing the resectability with curative intent in pancreatic and periampullary cancer.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Sep 15;9(9):CD011515. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011515.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016. PMID: 27631326 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and the management of pancreatic cancer.BMJ Open Gastroenterol. 2020 May;7(1):e000408. doi: 10.1136/bmjgast-2020-000408. BMJ Open Gastroenterol. 2020. PMID: 32414753 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
