You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 121 No. 5, May 1986 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  PAPERS READ BEFORE THE 93RD ANNUAL MEETING OF THE WESTERN SURGICAL ASSOCIATION, ROCHESTER, MINN, NOV 17-20, 1985-PART 1
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Evaluation of Gastric Adenocarcinoma

Abdominal Computed Tomography Does Not Replace Celiotomy

Allen O. Cook, MD; Barry A. Levine, MD; Kenneth R. Sirinek, MD, PhD; Harold V. Gaskill, III, MD

Arch Surg. 1986;121(5):603-606.


Abstract

• Computed tomography (CT) has been suggested as an alternative to celiotomy for predicting the stage and resectability of gastric carcinoma. Since it is the policy at our institution to explore all patients regardless of CT findings, this experience was reviewed to see if changes were warranted. Thirty-seven patients with gastric adenocarcinoma underwent preoperative CT scanning. The extent of disease found after operation was compared with the CT assessment. Nineteen patients (51%) were found to have more extensive disease than was predicted by CT. Of the six patients predicted to have widespread disease by CT, three (50%) were found at operation to have disease confined to the stomach or regional nodes. These data support a continued role for celiotomy in managing gastric adenocarcinoma of the stomach since a significant percentage of patients whose disease is believed to be unresectable after CT have potentially curable lesions.

(Arch Surg 1986;121:603-606)



Author Affiliations

From the Department of Surgery, The University of Texas Health Science Center and the Audie L. Murphy Veterans Administration Hospital, San Antonio.


Footnotes

Accepted for publication Jan 28, 1986.

Read before the 93rd Annual Meeting of the Western Surgical Association, Rochester, Minn, Nov 18, 1985.

Reprint requests to Department of Surgery, University of Texas Health Sciences Center, 7703 Floyd Curl Dr, San Antonio, TX 78284-7842 (Dr Levine).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

CT and PET in Stomach Cancer: Preoperative Staging and Monitoring of Response to Therapy
Lim et al.
RadioGraphics 2006;26:143-156.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Preoperative Staging of Gastric Adenocarcinoma: Comparison of Helical CT and Endoscopic US
Habermann et al.
Radiology 2004;230:465-471.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Spiral computed tomography and operative staging of gastric carcinoma: a comparison with histopathological staging
Davies et al.
Gut 1997;41:314-319.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Gastric Carcinoma
Lowy et al.
NEJM 1995;333:1426-1428.
FULL TEXT  

Gastric Carcinoma
Fuchs and Mayer
NEJM 1995;333:32-41.
FULL TEXT  

Responsibility of Clinical Surgeons Who Write
ADAR
Arch Surg 1987;122:958-958.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1986 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.