Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Integrated PET/CT and Linear Endosonography (EBUS and EUS)

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
New Therapeutic Strategies in Lung Cancers

  • 1312 Accesses

Abstract

Conventional imaging techniques are based on differences in tissue structure measured by differences in density (e.g. chest X-ray and CT). They allow exquisite anatomic detail and interpretation, and help in the assessment of many respiratory problems. Flexible videobronchoscopy gives an exquisite detail of the central airway mucosa, and facilitates the conventional transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA) technique which is indicated based on information given by the CT scan. Nonetheless, structural differences often don’t allow a definitive diagnosis based on conventional imaging, or nodal size limitation and absence of anatomical landmarks do not allow a conventional invasive TBNA tissue sampling. Positron emission tomography (PET) has brought a revolutionary novelty in imaging, because it was the first test readily applicable in daily clinical practice that allowed accurate non-invasive measurement of regional metabolic tissue functions in addition to the associated structural characteristics of CT scan. Linear endosonography (EBUS and EUS) has brought a revolutionary novelty in invasive tissue sampling, because it allows in daily clinical practice accurate invasive tissue sampling of lesions and/or lymph nodes all along the central tracheobronchial tree and/or oesophagogastric tract. In this chapter we will discuss the principles and technical aspects of the techniques, as well as indications for diagnosis and TNM staging of lung cancer.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. De Wever W, Stroobants S, Verschakelen JA. Integrated PET/CT in lung cancer imaging: history and technical aspects. JBR-BTR. 2007;90:112–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Pfannenberg AC, Aschoff P, Brechtel K, et al. Low dose non-enhanced CT versus standard dose contrast-enhanced CT in combined PET/CT protocols for staging and therapy planning in non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2007;34:36–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rusch VW, Asamura H, Watanabe H, et al. The IASLC lung cancer staging project: a proposal for a new international lymph node map in the forthcoming seventh edition of the TNM classification for lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2009;4:568–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. von Bartheld MB, Rabe KF, Annema JT. Transaortic EUS-guided FNA in the diagnosis of lung tumors and lymph nodes. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;69:345–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Fischer B, Mortensen J, Hojgaard L. Positron emission tomography in the diagnosis and staging of lung cancer: a systematic, quantitative review. Lancet Oncol. 2001;2:659–66.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Bryant AS, Cerfolio RJ. The maximum standardized uptake values on integrated FDG-PET/CT is useful in differentiating benign from malignant pulmonary nodules. Ann Thorac Surg. 2006;82:1016–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Swensen SJ, Silverstein MD, Ilstrup DM, et al. The probability of malignancy in solitary pulmonary nodules. Application to small radiologically indeterminate nodules. Arch Intern Med. 1997;157:849–55.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Herder GJ, Van Tinteren H, Golding RP, et al. Clinical prediction model to characterize pulmonary nodules: validation and added value of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. Chest. 2005;128:2490–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Patel V, Naik S, Naidlich D, et al. A practical algorithmic approach to the diagnosis and management of solitary pulmonary nodules. Chest. 2013;143:840–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Thunnissen E, Kerr KM, Herth FJ, et al. The challenge of NSCLC diagnosis and predictive analysis on small samples. Practical approach of a working group. Lung Cancer. 2012;76:1–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Nicholson A, Gonzalez D, Shah P, et al. Refining the diagnosis and EGFR status of non-small cell lung carcinoma in biopsy and cytologic material, using a panel of mucin staining, TTF-1, cytokeratin 5/6, and p63, and EGFR mutation analysis. J Thorac Oncol. 2010;5:436–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Tournoy K, Caprieaux M, Deschepper E, et al. Are EUS-FNA and EBUS-TBNA specimens reliable for subtyping non-small cell lung cancer? Lung Cancer. 2012;76:46–50.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Navani N, Brown J, Nankivell M, et al. Suitability of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration specimens for subtyping and genotyping of non-small cell lung cancer. A multicenter study of 774 patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012;185:1316–22.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Steinfort D, Russell P, Tsui A, et al. Interobserver agreement in determining non-small cell lung cancer subtype in specimens acquired by EBUS-TBNA. Eur Respir J. 2012;40:699–705.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Arcila M, Oxnard G, Nafa K, et al. Rebiopsy of lung cancer patients with acquired resistance to EGFR inhibitors and enhanced detection of the T790M mutation using a locked nucleic acid-based assay. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17:1196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. van Eijk R, Licht J, Schrumpf M, et al. Rapid KRAS, EGFR, BRAF and PIK3CA mutation analysis of fine needle aspirates from non-small-cell lung cancer using allele-specific qPCR. PLoS One. 2011;6:e17791.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Fischer B, Lassen U, Mortensen J, et al. Preoperative staging of lung cancer with combined PET-CT. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:32–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Maziak DE, Darling GE, Inculet RI, et al. Positron emission tomography in staging early lung cancer: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:221–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ung Y, Sun A, Macrae R, et al. Impact of positron emission tomography (PET) in stage III non-small cell lung cancer: a prospective randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27S:a7548.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Dinan MA, Curtis LH, Carpenter WR, et al. Stage migration, selection bias, and survival associated with the adoption of positron emission tomography among medicare beneficiaries with non-small cell lung cancer, 1998–2003. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:2725–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Wauters I, Stroobants S, De Leyn P, et al. Impact of FDG-PET induced treatment choices on long-term outcome in NSCLC. Respiration. 2010;79:97–104.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Yi C, Lee K, Lee H, et al. Coregistered whole body magnetic resonance imaging-positron (MRI-PET) versus PET-computed tomography plus brain MRI in staging resectable lung cancer. Cancer. 2013;119:1784–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lardinois D, Weder W, Hany TF, et al. Staging of non-small cell lung cancer with integrated positron-emission tomography and computed tomography. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:2500–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Lv Y, Yuan D, Wang K, et al. Diagnostic performance of integrated positron emission tomography/computed tomography for mediastinal lymph node staging in non-small cell lung cancer. A bivariate systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thorac Oncol. 2011;6:1350–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Micames C, McCrory D, Pavey D, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for non-small cell lung cancer staging: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Chest. 2007;131:539–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gu P, Zhao YZ, Jiang LY, Zhang W, Xin Y, Han BH. Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration for staging of lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer. 2009;45:1389–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Adams K, Shah PL, Edmonds L, Lim E. Test performance of endobronchial ultrasound and transbronchial needle aspiration biopsy for mediastinal staging in patients with lung cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Thorax. 2009;64:757–62.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Chandra S, Nehra M, Agarwal D, Mohan A. Diagnostic accuracy of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle biopsy in mediastinal lymphadenopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Respir Care. 2012;57:384–91.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Zhang R, Ying K, Shi L, et al. Combined endobronchial and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for mediastinal lymph node staging of lung cancer: a meta-analysis. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49:1860–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. De Leyn P, Lardinois D, Van Schil PE, et al. ESTS guidelines for preoperative lymph node staging for non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2007;32(1):1–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Annema JT, van Meerbeeck JP, Rintoul RC, et al. Mediastinoscopy vs endosonography for mediastinal nodal staging of lung cancer: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2010;304(20):2245–52.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Yasufuku K, Pierre A, Darling G, et al. A prospective controlled trial of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration compared with mediastinoscopy for mediastinal lymph node staging of lung cancer. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2011;142:1393–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Kang H, Hwangbo B, Lee G, et al. EBUS-centered versus EUS-centered mediastinal staging in lung cancer: a randomised controlled trial. Thorax. 2014;69(3):261–8. doi:10.1136/thoraxjnl-2013-203881.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Tournoy KG, De Ryck F, Vanwalleghem LR, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound reduces surgical mediastinal staging in lung cancer: a randomized trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2008;177:531–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Varela-Lema L, Fernández-Villar A, Ruano-Ravina A. Effectiveness and safety of endobronchial ultrasound-transbronchial needle aspiration: a systematic review. Eur Respir J. 2009;33:1156–64.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pulmonology, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, Leuven, 3000, Belgium

    Christophe Dooms

  2. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospitals Leuven, Herestraat 49, Leuven, 3000, Belgium

    Christophe Deroose

Authors
  1. Christophe Dooms
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christophe Deroose
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christophe Dooms .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Solange Peters

  2. Pathologie thoracique, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France

    Benjamin Besse

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dooms, C., Deroose, C. (2015). Integrated PET/CT and Linear Endosonography (EBUS and EUS). In: Peters, S., Besse, B. (eds) New Therapeutic Strategies in Lung Cancers. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06062-0_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-06062-0_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-06061-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-06062-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation