Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Prospective comparison of optic versus blind endoscopic ultrasound in staging esophageal cancer

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Esophageal tumours too stenotic to cross with optic endoprobe ultrasound (EUS) may still be staged with the blind endoprobe of 9 mm diameter. The aim of this study was to determine the relative accuracy of both optic and blind endoprobe-defined radiological stages when compared with the histopathological pTN stages.

Methods

Sixty-seven patients [8 squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), 59 adenocarcinoma (ACA)] with tumours too stenotic to allow optic endoprobe assessment underwent blind endoprobe examination and were compared with 146 patients (48 SCC, 98 ACA) undergoing optic endoprobe assessment. The strengths of agreement between the EUS stage and the histopathological stage were determined by the weighted kappa statistic (Kw).

Results

Tumour dilatation was required in 3 (2%) of the patients undergoing optic EUS compared with 20 (30%) of the patients undergoing blind EUS (p = 0.0001). Optic EUS T-stage Kw was 0.612 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.553–0.671, p = 0.0001] compared with 0.530 (0.426–0.634, p = 0.0001) for blind EUS. Optic EUS N-stage Kw was 0.639 (0.576–0.702, p = 0.0001) compared with 0.666 (0.565–0.737, p = 0.0001) for blind EUS. Patients undergoing blind probe EUS were more likely to have advanced tumour stage than patients undergoing optic probe EUS (p = 0.005).

Conclusions

Blind probe EUS facilitated complete radiological staging in 31% of cases that would otherwise have resulted in a designation of failure to cross at EUS, and was as accurate as optic probe EUS in assessing pTN stage.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kelly S, Harris KM, Berry E, Hutton J, Roderick P, Cullingworth J, Gathercole L, Smith MA (2001) A systematic review of the staging performance of endoscopic ultrasound in gastro-oesophageal carcinoma. Gut 49:534–539

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Choi JY, Lee KH, Shim YM, Lee KS, Kim JJ, Kim SE, Kim BT (2000) Improved detection of individual nodal involvement in squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus by FDG PET. J Nucl Med 41:808–815

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Choi JY, Jang HJ, Shim YM, Kim K, Lee KS, Lee KH, Choi Y, Choe YS, Kim BT (2004) 18F-FDG PET in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma undergoing curative surgery: prognostic implications. J Nucl Med 45:1843–1850

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Gore RM, Yaghmai V, Berlin JW, Newmark GM (2004) Oesophageal cancer. Taylor and Francis, London

    Google Scholar 

  5. Vrieze O, Haustermans K, De WW, Lerut T, Van CE, Ectors N, Hiele M, Flamen P (2004) Is there a role for FGD-PET in radiotherapy planning in esophageal carcinoma? Radiother Oncol 73:269–275

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Pfau PR, Ginsberg GG, Lew RJ, Faigel DO, Smith DB, Kochman ML (2000) Esophageal dilation for endosonographic evaluation of malignant esophageal strictures is safe and effective. Am J Gastroenterol 95:2813–2815

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Vickers J, Alderson D (1998) Influence of luminal obstruction on oesophageal cancer staging using endoscopic ultrasonography. Br J Surg 85:999–1001

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Morgan MA, Twine CP, Lewis WG, Lambe R, Oliphant HE, Robinson M, Crosby TD, Roberts SA (2008) Prognostic significance of failure to cross esophageal tumors by endoluminal ultrasound. Dis Esophagus 21(6):508–513

    Google Scholar 

  9. Weaver SR, Blackshaw GR, Lewis WG, Edwards P, Roberts SA, Thomas GV, Allison MC (2004) Comparison of special interest computed tomography, endosonography and histopathological stage of oesophageal cancer. Clin Radiol 59:499–504

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Stephens MR, Lewis WG, Brewster AE, Lord I, Blackshaw GR, Hodzovic I, Thomas GV, Roberts SA, Crosby TD, Gent C, Allison MC, Shute K (2006) Multidisciplinary team management is associated with improved outcomes after surgery for esophageal cancer. Dis Esophagus 19:164–171

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sobin LH, Wittekind CH (2002) TNM classification of malignant tumours, 6th edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  12. Orringer MB (1984) Transhiatal esophagectomy without thoracotomy for carcinoma of the thoracic esophagus. Ann Surg 200:282–288

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lewis I (1964) The surgical treatment of carcinoma of the oesophagus, with special reference to a new operation for growths of the middle third. Br J Surg 51:53–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Tanner IC (1947) The present position of carcinoma of the oesophagus. Postgrad Med J 23:109–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Altman DG (1991) Practical Statistics for Medical Research. Chapman & Hall/CRC, London

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kaplan EL, Meier P (1958) Non-parametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 58:457–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Beseth BD, Bedford R, Isacoff WH, Holmes EC, Cameron RB (2000) Endoscopic ultrasound does not accurately assess pathologic stage of esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Am Surg 66:827–831

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kalha I, Kaw M, Fukami N, Patel M, Singh S, Gagneja H, Cohen D, Morris J (2004) The accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound for restaging esophageal carcinoma after chemoradiation therapy. Cancer 101:940–947

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Morgan MA, Lewis WG, Crosby TD, Escofet X, Roberts SA, Brewster AE, Harvard TJ, Clark GW (2007) Prospective cohort comparison of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus chemotherapy in patients with oesophageal cancer. Br J Surg 94:1509–1514

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Morgan MA, Lewis WG, Hopper AN, Escofet X, Havard TJ, Brewster AE, Crosby TD, Roberts SA, Clark GW (2007) Prospective comparison of transthoracic versus transhiatal esophagectomy following neoadjuvant therapy for esophageal cancer. Dis Esophagus 20:225–231

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Davies AR, Deans DA, Penman I, Plevris JN, Fletcher J, Wall L, Phillips H, Gilmour H, Patel D, de   BA, Paterson-Brown S (2006) The multidisciplinary team meeting improves staging accuracy and treatment selection for gastro-esophageal cancer. Dis Esophagus 19:496–503

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Omloo JM, Lagarde SM, Hulscher JB, Reitsma JB, Fockens P, van   DH, Ten Kate FJ, Obertop H, Tilanus HW, van Lanschot JJ (2007) Extended transthoracic resection compared with limited transhiatal resection for adenocarcinoma of the mid/distal esophagus: five-year survival of a randomized clinical trial. Ann Surg 246:992–1000

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Shimada H, Okazumi S, Matsubara H, Nabeya Y, Shiratori T, Shimizu T, Shuto K, Hayashi H, Ochiai T (2006) Impact of the number and extent of positive lymph nodes in 200 patients with thoracic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma after three-field lymph node dissection. World J Surg 30:1441–1449

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Binmoeller KF, Seifert H, Seitz U, Izbicki JR, Kida M, Soehendra N (1995) Ultrasonic esophagoprobe for TNM staging of highly stenosing esophageal carcinoma. Gastrointest Endosc 41:547–552

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Bowrey DJ, Clark GW, Roberts SA, Maughan TS, Hawthorne AB, Williams GT, Carey PD (1999) Endosonographic staging of 100 consecutive patients with esophageal carcinoma: introduction of the 8-mm esophagoprobe. Dis Esophagus 12:258–263

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Nesje LB, Svanes K, Viste A, Laerum OD, Odegaard S (2000) Comparison of a linear miniature ultrasound probe and a radial-scanning echoendoscope in TN staging of esophageal cancer. Scand J Gastroenterol 35:997–1002

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Vu C, Tsang S, Doig L, Meenan J (2007) The preferred choice for radial endosonographic staging of esophageal cancer: standard echoendoscope or nonoptic esophagoprobe? Surg Endosc 21:1617–1622

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Neveu D, Aubas P, Seguret F, Kramar A, Dujols P (2006) Measuring agreement for ordered ratings in 3 × 3 tables. Methods Inf Med 45:541–547

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Andres AM, Marzo PF (2005) Chance-corrected measures of reliability and validity in K × K tables. Stat Methods Med Res 14:473–492

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Valet F, Guinot C, Ezzedine K, Mary JY (2008) Quality assessment of ordinal scale reproducibility: log-linear models provided useful information on scale structure. J Clin Epidemiol In Press

  32. Valet F, Guinot C, Mary JY (2007) Log-linear non-uniform association models for agreement between two ratings on an ordinal scale. Stat Med 26:647–662

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Svanholm H, Starklint H, Gundersen HJ, Fabricius J, Barlebo H, Olsen S (1989) Reproducibility of histomorphologic diagnoses with special reference to the kappa statistic. APMIS 97:689–698

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Kelsen DP, Ginsberg R, Pajak TF, Sheahan DG, Gunderson L, Mortimer J, Estes N, Haller DG, Ajani J, Kocha W, Minsky BD, Roth JA (1998) Chemotherapy followed by surgery compared with surgery alone for localized esophageal cancer. N Engl J Med 339:1979–1984

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Group Medical Research Council Oesophageal Cancer Working (2002) Surgical resection with or without preoperative chemotherapy in oesophageal cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 359:1727–1733

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Morgan MA, Lewis WG, Casbard A, Roberts SA, Adams R, Clark GW, Havard TJ, Crosby TD (2009) Stage for stage comparison of definitive chemoradiation, surgery alone and neoadjuvant chemotherapy for oesophageal carcinoma. Br J Surg, in press

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge Mr. G. Clark and Mr. T. Havard, consultant general surgeons, who treated patients in this study and kindly allowed access to the details of their patients.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK

    Christopher P. Twine, Wyn G. Lewis, Xavier Escofet & David Bosanquet

  2. Department of Radiology, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK

    S. Ashley Roberts

  3. University Hospital of Wales, Heath Park, Cardiff, CF14 4XW, UK

    Wyn G. Lewis

Authors
  1. Christopher P. Twine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wyn G. Lewis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xavier Escofet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. David Bosanquet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. S. Ashley Roberts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wyn G. Lewis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Twine, C.P., Lewis, W.G., Escofet, X. et al. Prospective comparison of optic versus blind endoscopic ultrasound in staging esophageal cancer. Surg Endosc 23, 2778–2784 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-009-0491-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-009-0491-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation