Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of Positron Emission Tomography, Computed Tomography, and Endoscopic Ultrasound in the Initial Staging of Patients with Esophageal Cancer

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Molecular Imaging and Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Improvement in esophageal cancer staging is needed. Positron emission tomography (PET), computed tomography (CT), and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in the staging of esophageal carcinoma were compared.

Methods

PET, CT, and EUS were performed and interpreted prospectively in 75 patients with newly diagnosed esophageal cancer. Either tissue confirmation or fine needle aspiration (FNA) was used as the gold standard of disease. Sensitivity and specificity for tumor, nodal, and metastatic (TNM) disease for each test were determined. TNM categorizations from each test were used to assign patients to subgroups corresponding to the three treatment plans that patients could theoretically receive, and these were then compared.

Results

Local tumor staging (T) was done correctly by CT and PET in 42% and by EUS in 71% of patients (P value > 0.14). The sensitivity and specificity for nodal involvement (N) by modality were 84% and 67% for CT, 86% and 67% for EUS, and 82% and 60% for PET (P value > 0.38). The sensitivity and specificity for distant metastasis were 81% and 82% for CT, 73% and 86% for EUS, and 81% and 91% for PET (P value > 0.25). Treatment assignment was done correctly by CT in 65%, by EUS in 75%, and by PET in 70% of patients (P value > 0.34).

Conclusions

EUS had superior T staging ability over PET and CT in our study group. The tests showed similar performance in nodal staging and there was a trend toward improved distant disease staging with CT or PET over EUS. Assignment to treatment groups in relation to TNM staging tended to be better by EUS. Each test contributed unique patient staging information on an individual basis.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Goldberg M, Farma J, Lampert C et al. (2003) Survival following intensive preoperative combined modality therapy with paclitaxel, cisplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and radiation in resectable esophageal carcinoma: A phase I report. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 126(4):1168–1173

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Saltzman JR (2003) Section III: Endoscopic and other staging techniques. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 15(2):180–186

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lerut T, Coosemans W, Decker G et al. (2004) Extended surgery for cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction. J Surg Res 117(1):58–63

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Rice TW (2000) Clinical staging of esophageal carcinoma. CT, EUS, and PET. Chest Surg Clin North Am 10(3):471–85

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. van Westreenen HL, Westerterp M, Bossuyt PM et al. (2004) Systematic review of the staging performance of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in esophageal cancer. J Clin Oncol 22(18):3805–3812

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wallace MB, Nietert PJ, Earle C et al. (2002) An analysis of multiple staging management strategies for carcinoma of the esophagus: Computed tomography, endoscopic ultrasound, positron emission tomography, and thoracoscopy/laparoscopy. Ann Thorac Surg 74(4):1026–1032

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Rosh T, (1994) Endoscopic ultrasonography. Endoscopy 26:148–168

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Wiersema MJ, Giovannini VPM, Chang KJ, Wiersema LM (1997) Endosonography-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy: Diagnostic accuracy and complication assessment. Gastroenterology 112:1087–1095

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Lerut T, Flamen P, Ectors N et al. (2000) Histopathologic validation of lymph node staging with FDG-PET scan in cancer of the esophagus and gastroesophageal junction: A prospective study based on primary surgery with extensive lymphadenectomy. Ann Surg 232(6):743–752

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kneist W, Schreckenberger M, Bartenstein P, Grunwald F, Oberholzer K, Junginger T (2003) Positron emission tomography for staging esophageal cancer: does it lead to a different therapeutic approach? World J Surg 27(10):1105–1112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Heeren PA, Jager PL, Bongaerts F, van Dullemen H, Sluiter W, Plukker JT (2004) Detection of distant metastases in esophageal cancer with (18)F-FDG PET. J Nucl Med 45(6):980–987

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Terry Brinkman for her administrative support of this project. This study was supported by Mayo Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA

    Val J. Lowe MD, Fargol Booya MD, J. G. Fletcher MD, Mark Nathan MD, Eric Jensen MD, Brian Mullan MD & Eric Rohren MD, PhD

  2. Department of Gastroenterology, Mayo Clinic Rochester, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA

    Val J. Lowe MD, Maurits J. Wiersema MD, Enrique Vazquez-Sequeiros MD, Joseph A. Murray MD, Michael J. Levy MD & Jonathan E. Clain MD

  3. Department of Thoracic Surgery, Mayo Clinic Rochester, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, 55905, USA

    Mark S. Allen MD

Authors
  1. Val J. Lowe MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fargol Booya MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. G. Fletcher MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mark Nathan MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Eric Jensen MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Brian Mullan MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Eric Rohren MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Maurits J. Wiersema MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Enrique Vazquez-Sequeiros MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Joseph A. Murray MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Mark S. Allen MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Michael J. Levy MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Jonathan E. Clain MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Val J. Lowe MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lowe, V.J., Booya, F., Fletcher, J.G. et al. Comparison of Positron Emission Tomography, Computed Tomography, and Endoscopic Ultrasound in the Initial Staging of Patients with Esophageal Cancer. Mol Imaging Biol 7, 422–430 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-005-0017-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-005-0017-0

Key words

Search

Navigation