We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Accuracy of high-frequency catheter-based endoscopic ultrasonography according to the indications for endoscopic treatment of early gastric cancer.
Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2010 March
BACKGROUND AND AIM: The development of endoscopic treatment, such as endoscopic submucosal dissection, extends the indications for endoscopic resection in patients with early gastric cancer (EGC). Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is the first-choice imaging modality for determining the depth of invasion of gastric cancer. The aim of the present study was to prospectively assess the accuracy of EUS for determining the depth of EGC, according to the accepted/extended indications.
METHODS: We prospectively included a total of 181 lesions in 178 patients, with an endoscopic diagnosis of EGC, who underwent EUS for staging the depth of tumor invasion using a 20-MHz catheter probe. We investigated the accuracy of EUS for determining the depth of endoscopically-suspected EGC and then analyzed the difference in the accuracy of EUS according to the accepted/extended indications.
RESULTS: Of the 178 patients, five patients were dropped because of the absence of final histological results. For the 176 lesions in 173 patients, the accuracy of EUS assessment for the depth of tumor invasion was 80.7% (142 of 176 lesions). The accuracy of EUS for the lesions with accepted indications and with extended indications was 97.6% (40 of 41 lesions) and 83.6% (46 of 57 lesions), respectively (P = 0.040). Of the lesions with extended indications, the accuracy of EUS decreased especially for the lesions with ulceration and those with minute submucosal invasion (79.2% and 42.9%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of EUS for the lesions with the extended indications was lower than that for the lesions with the accepted indications. In particular, lesions with ulceration and minute submucosal invasion should be carefully considered prior to endoscopic treatment by pretreatment EUS staging.
METHODS: We prospectively included a total of 181 lesions in 178 patients, with an endoscopic diagnosis of EGC, who underwent EUS for staging the depth of tumor invasion using a 20-MHz catheter probe. We investigated the accuracy of EUS for determining the depth of endoscopically-suspected EGC and then analyzed the difference in the accuracy of EUS according to the accepted/extended indications.
RESULTS: Of the 178 patients, five patients were dropped because of the absence of final histological results. For the 176 lesions in 173 patients, the accuracy of EUS assessment for the depth of tumor invasion was 80.7% (142 of 176 lesions). The accuracy of EUS for the lesions with accepted indications and with extended indications was 97.6% (40 of 41 lesions) and 83.6% (46 of 57 lesions), respectively (P = 0.040). Of the lesions with extended indications, the accuracy of EUS decreased especially for the lesions with ulceration and those with minute submucosal invasion (79.2% and 42.9%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of EUS for the lesions with the extended indications was lower than that for the lesions with the accepted indications. In particular, lesions with ulceration and minute submucosal invasion should be carefully considered prior to endoscopic treatment by pretreatment EUS staging.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app