Rectal Cancer - Staging and Surgical Approach (original) (raw)
Related papers
Preoperative staging of rectal cancer
Acta Oncologica, 2008
With the widespread introduction of preoperative radiotherapy for rectal cancer and the development of transanal endoscopic microsurgery for selected early lesions, preoperative radiological staging of these tumours has taken on increasing importance. This study is a systematic review to evaluate computed tomography (CT), endorectal sonography (ES) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as preoperative staging modalities in rectal cancer. A Medline-based search identifying studies using CT, ES, or MRI in preoperative staging of rectal cancer between 1980 and 1998 was undertaken. The list of papers was supplemented by extensive cross-checking of citation lists. Studies were included if they met predetermined criteria. Data from the accepted studies were entered into pooled tables comparing radiological and pathological staging results for each modality both in determining bowel wall penetration and involvement of lymph nodes. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio were determined for the pooled results. Eighty-three studies from 78 papers including 4897 patients met the inclusion criteria. In determining the wall penetration of the tumour the values for sensitivity for CT, ES, MRI and MRI with endorectal coil were 78%, 93%, 86% and 89%; for specificity 63%, 78%, 77% and 79%; and for accuracy 73%, 87%, 82% and 84%, respectively. In determining the nodal involvement by tumour the sensitivity values for CT, ES, MRI and MRI with endorectal coil 52%, 71%, 65% and 82%; for specificity 78%, 76%, 80% and 83%; and for accuracy 66%, 74%, 74% and 82%, respectively. MRI with an endorectal coil is the single investigation that most accurately predicts pathological stage in rectal cancer.
Medical ultrasonography, 2015
Endoscopic ultrasound is recommended for rectal cancer staging. Transrectal ultrasound approach is able to overcome one of the limitations of this technique regarding circumferential rectal stenosis. Prior intrarectal administration of a small amount of fluid contrast agent optimizes the method, making it easier to distinguish the layers of the rectal wall and tumor formation. Endoscopic ultrasound focuses on the gray-scale mode. Additional procedures provide useful information for tumor assessment: Doppler ultrasound helps identify chaotic intratumoral vascularization; 3D ultrasound allows the assessment and accurate measurement of the tumor; elastography can identify focal tumor dysplasia within adenomas; contrast-enhanced ultrasound allows characterization of tumor microvasculature. Even if they are not as accurate in distinguishing rectal wall layers, cross-sectional imaging techniques (CT, MRI) can identify the anatomical relationships of advanced locoregional cancers, as well ...
Comparative study for preoperative staging of rectal cancer
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum, 1989
Rectum 1989;32:53-56. A comparative study of preoperative evaluation of rectal cancer is presented. Sixty-eight patients with rectal cancer were examined digitally and by computerized tomography and transrectal ultrasound.
How useful is rectal endosonography in the staging of rectal cancer?
World Journal of Gastroenterology, 2010
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.
Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology, 2008
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 38Á89) were treated with surgery alone. The mean size of the tumour was 4.0 cm (range 1.1Á7.5). 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 (pB0. 01); specificity was 83% for R1 and 46% for R2 (pB0.05). The MRI sensitivity in rectal tumour T-staging was 96% for R1 and 77% for R2 (pB0. 05); the specificity was 74% for R1 and 40% for R2 (pB0.05). 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.
Optimal Methods for Staging Rectal Cancer
Clinical Cancer Research, 2007
At present, several modalities exist for the preoperative staging of rectal lesions, including computed tomography (CT), body coil or endorectal coil magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) done by rigid or flexible probes, and positron emission tomography (PET). Staging accuracy for CT ranges from 53% to 94% for T-stage accuracy and from 54% to 70% for N-stage accuracy. Improved CT accuracy is observed at higher disease stages. Body coil MRI has shown T- and N-stage accuracy ranging from 59% to 95% and 39% to 95%, respectively. Endorectal coil MRI has shown improved T- and N-stage accuracy, with rates of 66% to 91% and 72% to 79%, respectively. The development of phased-array MRI, combining high spatial resolution with a larger field of view, offers promise to improve on these rates. EUS, considered the current gold standard, has shown T-stage accuracy ranging from 75% to 95%, with N-stage accuracy ranging from 65% to 80%. Flexible EUS probes have the adv...
Endorectal Ultrasonography and Treatment of Early Stage Rectal Cancer
World Journal of Surgery, 2000
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of preoperative staging by endorectal ultrasonography (EUS) and its contribution to treatment of early stage rectal cancer (ESRC). The results of EUS for 154 consecutive patients with ESRC (pTis to pT2) were compared prospectively with histologic findings, assessed according to the TNM classification. Results of treatment selection and long-term outcomes were analyzed retrospectively. There were 35 patients histologically staged as pTis, 8 as pT1-slight (invasion confined to the superficial one-third of the submucosa), 37 as pT1-massive (invasion extending to the deeper submucosa), and 74 as pT2. The equipment used was an echoendoscope GF-UM2 or GF-UM3 (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan). Sensitivity/specificity/ overall accuracy rates for detection of slight submucosal invasion, massive submucosal invasion, and muscularis propria invasion were 99%/ 74%/96%, 98%/88%/97%, and 97%/93%/96%, respectively. Incidences of lymph node metastasis in pTis, pTis to pT1-slight, pT1, pT1-massive, and pT2 cases were 0%, 0%, 18%, 22%, and 30%, respectively. Incidences of lymph node metastasis in ESRCs staged by EUS (u) as uTis, uT1-slight, uT1-massive, uT2, and uT3 by EUS were 0%, 0%, 26%, 36%, and 64%, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy rates for detection of positive nodes in overall ESRCs were 53%, 77%, and 72%, respectively. Of the 43 patients with pTis to pT1-slight tumors, 22 underwent endoscopic polypectomy or local excision, 20 radical surgery, and 1 radical surgery after endoscopic polypectomy due to vascular invasion. All these patients are alive and all but one (who refused radical surgery due to vascular invasion after local excision and developed liver and lung metastases) are disease-free. Of the 37 patients with pT1-massive tumors, 34 underwent radical surgery and 3 transcoccygeal segmental resection. All these patients are alive disease-free except for one who died of peritoneal carcinomatosis after radical surgery. All patients with pT2 tumors underwent radical surgery. The overall 5-year survival rates for pTis, pT1, and pT2 cases were 100%, 98%, and 97%, respectively. EUS is an accurate method for evaluating invasion depth in ESRC. Patients with uTis or uT1-slight tumors staged by EUS are at low risk of positive nodes and good candidates for endoscopic polypectomy or local excision. Those with uT1-massive or uT2 lesions should be treated with a radical operation because of the high incidence of positive nodes.
Imaging paradigms in assessment of rectal carcinoma: loco-regional and distant staging
Cancer Imaging, 2012
The role of imaging in the management of rectal malignancy has progressively evolved and undergone several paradigm shifts. Unlike a few decades ago when the role of a radiologist was restricted at defining the longitudinal extent of the tumour with barium enema, recent advances in imaging techniques permit highly accurate locoregional and distant staging of the disease as well as prognostication on those who are likely to have a postoperative recurrence. Computed tomography (CT) has always been the mainstay of imaging when evaluating for distant metastasis, with the advent of positron emission tomography/CT improving its specificity. In rectal malignancy, it is the local extent of the disease that often influences the surgical decision making and need for neoadjuvant therapy. Although endoscopic ultrasound has been the traditional technique for determining the depth of tumour invasion, over the last decade magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has emerged as a very effective tool for accurate T-staging. This review intends to address the status of various imaging modalities and their advantages and limitations in detection, pretreatment staging, and assessment of therapeutic efficacy in rectal cancer, with emphasis on MRI of high spatial resolution.