Document Detail


Restaging of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer With Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Endoluminal Ultrasound After Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy: A Systemic Review and Meta-analysis.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  24509465     Owner:  NLM     Status:  In-Data-Review    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging and endoluminal ultrasound play an important role in the restaging of locally advanced rectal cancer after preoperative chemoradiotherapy, yet their diagnostic accuracy is still controversial.
OBJECTIVE: Meta-analysis was performed to estimate the diagnostic performance of MRI and endoluminal ultrasound.
DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases from 1996 to March 2012 were searched.
STUDY SELECTION AND INTERVENTIONS: Either MRI or endoluminal ultrasound was used to restage rectal cancer after chemoradiotherapy or radiation.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: T category, lymph node, and circumferential resection involvement were measured.
RESULTS: The sensitivity estimate for rectal cancer diagnosis (T0) by endoluminal ultrasound (37.0%; 95% CI, 24.0%-52.1%) was higher (p = 0.04) than the sensitivity estimate for MRI (15.3%; 95% CI, 6.5%-32.0%). For T3-4 category, sensitivity estimates of MRI and endoluminal ultrasound were comparable, 82.1% and 87.6%, whereas specificity estimates were poor (53.5% and 66.4%). For lymph node involvement, there was no significant difference between the sensitivity estimates for MRI (61.8%) and endoluminal ultrasound (49.8%). Specificity estimates for MRI and endoluminal ultrasound were 72.0% and 78.7%. For circumferential resection margin involvement, MRI sensitivity and specificity were 85.4% and 80.0%.
LIMITATIONS: To identify the heterogeneity, metaregression was performed on covariates. However, few of the covariates were identified to be statistically significant because of the lack of adequate original data.
CONCLUSION: Accurate restaging of locally advanced rectal cancer by MRI and endoluminal ultrasound is still a challenge. Identifying T0 rectal cancer by imaging is not reliable. Before performing surgery, restaging is important, but some of the T0-2 patients are likely overestimated as T3-4. Both modalities for lymph node involvement are not very good. Magnetic resonance imaging may be a good method to reassess circumferential resection margin.
Authors:
Ri-Sheng Zhao; Hui Wang; Zhi-Yang Zhou; Qian Zhou; Michael W Mulholland
Related Documents :
23566435 - (18)fdg pet-ct for diagnosis of distant metastases in breast cancer patients. a meta-an...
24819235 - Updated trends in imaging use in men diagnosed with prostate cancer.
1449185 - Radiographic differential diagnosis of petrous apex lesions.
9606395 - Dental mr tomography of the mandible.
24793475 - Pineal calcification is a novel risk factor for symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage.
8075555 - Mri of budd-chiari syndrome.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Diseases of the colon and rectum     Volume:  57     ISSN:  1530-0358     ISO Abbreviation:  Dis. Colon Rectum     Publication Date:  2014 Mar 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2014-02-10     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  0372764     Medline TA:  Dis Colon Rectum     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  388-95     Citation Subset:  IM    
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  Achieving a complete colonic evaluation in patients with incomplete colonoscopy is worth the effort.
Next Document:  Polymerase proofreading-associated polyposis: a new, dominantly inherited syndrome of hereditary col...