Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2005 Jun;129(6):1232-41.
doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2004.12.042.

The accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography with fine-needle aspiration, integrated positron emission tomography with computed tomography, and computed tomography in restaging patients with esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy

Affiliations
Free article

The accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography with fine-needle aspiration, integrated positron emission tomography with computed tomography, and computed tomography in restaging patients with esophageal cancer after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy

Robert James Cerfolio et al. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2005 Jun.
Free article

Abstract

Background: Patients with esophageal cancer who receive neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy are restaged with computed tomography (CT), endoscopic ultrasound with fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), and integrated positron emission computed tomography (FDG-PET/CT), and the results affect treatment.

Methods: This is a prospective trial on a consecutive series of patients who had initial chest, abdomen, and pelvis CT scan; EUS-FNA; and fluoro-2-deoxy- d -glucose (FDG)-integrated PET/CT; neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy; repeat staging tests; pathologic staging; and, if appropriate, resection with lymphadenectomy. The primary objective was to assess the accuracy of these 3 tests in restaging patients after neoadjuvant therapy.

Results: There were 48 patients (41 men), and 41 underwent Ivor Lewis esophagogastrectomy with lymphadenectomy. The accuracy of each test for distinguishing pathologic T4 from T1 to T3 disease is 76%, 80%, and 80% for CT scan, EUS-FNA and FDG-PET/CT, respectively. The accuracy for nodal disease was 78%, 78%, and 93% for CT scan, EUS-FNA and FDG-PET/CT, respectively ( P = .04). FDG-PET/CT correctly identified M1b disease in 4 patients, falsely suggested it in 4 patients, and missed it in 2 patients, whereas for CT, it was 3, 3, and 3 patients. Fifteen (31%) patients were complete responders, and FDG-PET/CT accurately predicted complete response in 89% compared with 67% for EUS-FNA ( P = .045) and 71% for CT ( P = .05).

Conclusions: FDG-PET/CT is more accurate than EUS-FNA and CT scan for predicting nodal status and complete responders after neoadjuvant therapy in patients with esophageal cancer. FDG-PET/CT and CT alone provide targets for biopsy, but results are often falsely positive.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

MeSH terms