Suppr超能文献

内镜超声与磁共振成像在胰腺癌分期中的比较。

Comparison between endoscopic ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging for the staging of pancreatic cancer.

机构信息

Digestive Health Center, University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, VA 22908-0708, USA.

出版信息

Pancreas. 2011 May;40(4):567-70. doi: 10.1097/MPA.0b013e3182153b8c.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Preoperative staging of pancreatic cancer is crucial for proper therapy. Through this study, we aimed to compare the ability of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to effectively detect and stage pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

One hundred twenty-seven patients undergoing EUS-fine-needle aspiration and MRI for the workup of pancreatic cancer were captured in a prospective database for comparison. The final surgical stage was recorded in patients who went to surgery.

RESULTS

Of 127 patients, 48 were surgically explored, and of these, 22 (46%) underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy. Agreement in the patients' staging between EUS and MRI was 94 (74%) of 127. Magnetic resonance imaging was more likely to report metastatic disease or arterial involvement. The overall correlation between EUS and MRI was marginal (κ = 0.42; 95% CI, 0.26-0.58). Of the 48 surgically explored patients, 12 (25%) were understaged by MRI, 13 (27%) were understaged by EUS, and 1 (2%) were overstaged. Endoscopic US and MRI had a sensitivity of 34 (97.2%) of 35 for stage II tumors and 35 (100%) of 35 for lower-stage tumors, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic US and MRI had marginal correlation for staging, especially the more advanced tumors. Although EUS has the added advantage of tissue acquisition for confirmation, the tumors understaged by both the modalities were different. Therefore, both tests should be performed for accurate staging.

摘要

目的

胰腺癌的术前分期对于恰当的治疗至关重要。通过本研究,我们旨在比较内镜超声(EUS)和磁共振成像(MRI)有效检测和分期胰腺癌的能力。

方法

我们在一个前瞻性数据库中纳入了 127 例行 EUS 细针抽吸和 MRI 检查以评估胰腺癌的患者,对这些患者进行比较。在接受手术的患者中记录最终的手术分期。

结果

在 127 例患者中,48 例接受了手术探查,其中 22 例(46%)接受了胰十二指肠切除术。EUS 和 MRI 对患者分期的一致性为 127 例中的 94 例(74%)。MRI 更有可能报告转移性疾病或动脉受累。EUS 和 MRI 之间的总体相关性为边缘性(κ=0.42;95%CI,0.26-0.58)。在接受手术探查的 48 例患者中,MRI 低估了 12 例(25%)、EUS 低估了 13 例(27%),1 例(2%)被高估。EUS 和 MRI 对 II 期肿瘤的敏感度分别为 35 例中的 34 例(97.2%)和 35 例中的 35 例(100%)。

结论

EUS 和 MRI 对分期的相关性为边缘性,尤其是对更晚期的肿瘤。尽管 EUS 具有获取组织进行确认的额外优势,但两种方法低估的肿瘤分期不同。因此,为了进行准确的分期,应同时进行这两种检查。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验