Suppr超能文献

通过内镜超声、经腹超声和计算机断层扫描对壶腹周围肿瘤进行术前评估。

Preoperative evaluation of periampullary tumors by endoscopic sonography, transabdominal sonography, and computed tomography.

作者信息

Chen C H, Tseng L J, Yang C C, Yeh Y H

机构信息

Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Changhua Show-Chwan Memorial Hospital, 542, Section 1, Chung-Shang Road, Changhua 500, Taiwan.

出版信息

J Clin Ultrasound. 2001 Jul-Aug;29(6):313-21. doi: 10.1002/jcu.1041.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare the sensitivity of endoscopic sonography (EUS), transabdominal sonography (US), and CT in the detection of, local staging of, and prediction of vascular involvement by or distant metastasis from periampullary tumors.

METHODS

Seventy-four consecutive patients with presumed periampullary tumors were evaluated by EUS, US, and CT during a 3.25-year period. The local staging accuracy of the modalities was assessed in the 36 patients with solid tumors who underwent surgery. The sensitivity of the modalities in predicting vascular involvement and distant metastasis was assessed in the 56 patients with carcinomas.

RESULTS

EUS was the most sensitive modality in the detection (EUS, 97%; US, 24%; and CT, 39%; p < 0.001 for EUS versus US or CT) and T classification (EUS, 72%; US, 11%; CT, 22%; p < 0.001 for EUS versus US or CT) of periampullary tumors. EUS also had better sensitivity than US in detecting lymph node metastasis from periampullary cancers (EUS, 47%; US, 7%; and CT, 33%; p = 0.02 for EUS versus US; p = 0.7 for EUS versus CT). The accuracy of EUS in determining the T classification (without stent, 81%; with stent, 65%) and N classification (without stent, 80%; with stent, 70%) tended to decrease in the presence of an endobiliary stent, but the differences were not significant. EUS was the most sensitive modality in demonstrating vascular involvement (EUS, 100%; US, 0%; and CT, 33%; p = 0.002 for EUS versus US; p = 0.03 for EUS versus CT) but was not significantly different in detecting distant metastasis (EUS, 11%; US, 44%; and CT, 44%).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS is superior to US and CT in the local assessment of periampullary tumors. The staging accuracy of EUS is minimally but not significantly affected by the presence of an endobiliary stent.

摘要

目的

本回顾性研究旨在比较内镜超声(EUS)、经腹超声(US)和CT在壶腹周围肿瘤的检测、局部分期以及血管受累或远处转移预测方面的敏感性。

方法

在3.25年的时间里,对74例疑似壶腹周围肿瘤的连续患者进行了EUS、US和CT评估。对36例接受手术的实体瘤患者评估了这些检查方法的局部分期准确性。对56例癌症患者评估了这些检查方法在预测血管受累和远处转移方面的敏感性。

结果

EUS在壶腹周围肿瘤的检测(EUS为97%;US为24%;CT为39%;EUS与US或CT相比,p<0.001)和T分类(EUS为72%;US为11%;CT为22%;EUS与US或CT相比,p<0.001)方面是最敏感的检查方法。EUS在检测壶腹周围癌的淋巴结转移方面也比US更敏感(EUS为47%;US为7%;CT为33%;EUS与US相比,p = 0.02;EUS与CT相比,p = 0.7)。在存在胆管内支架的情况下,EUS在确定T分类(无支架时为81%;有支架时为65%)和N分类(无支架时为80%;有支架时为70%)方面的准确性有下降趋势,但差异不显著。EUS在显示血管受累方面是最敏感的检查方法(EUS为100%;US为0%;CT为33%;EUS与US相比,p = 0.002;EUS与CT相比,p = 0.03),但在检测远处转移方面无显著差异(EUS为11%;US为44%;CT为44%)。

结论

EUS在壶腹周围肿瘤的局部评估方面优于US和CT。胆管内支架的存在对EUS的分期准确性有轻微但不显著的影响。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验