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. 139 No. 10, October 2004 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Original Article
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on ISI (16)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Gastrointestinal Diseases
 •Non-cardiothoracic Surgery
 •Thoracic Surgery
 •PET/ SPECT Imaging
 •Alert me on articles by topic

Prospective Evaluation of Positron Emission Tomography in the Preoperative Staging of Esophageal Carcinoma

Werner Kneist, MD; Mathias Schreckenberger, MD, PhD; Peter Bartenstein, MD, PhD; Christian Menzel, MD, PhD; Katja Oberholzer, MD; Theodor Junginger, MD, PhD

Arch Surg. 2004;139:1043-1049.

Hypothesis  Positron emission tomography (PET) is a useful tool in the selection of patients with esophageal cancer who may not benefit from esophageal resection.

Design  Case series.

Setting  Tertiary care hospital.

Patients  Eighty-one patients with newly diagnosed esophageal cancer who underwent PET and computer tomography (CT) of the chest and abdomen (and of the neck in 45 patients) within 45 days were included.

Main Outcome Measures  We calculated the sensitivity and specificity in detecting metastatic sites on the basis of 31 histologically verified lesions. In addition to results obtained on CT, the information provided by PET was evaluated with a view to the choice of management strategies.

Results  The PET findings had a higher specificity (89% vs 11%) but a lower sensitivity (38% vs 63%) than CT findings in the detection of metastatic sites. The CT results showed greater agreement with histopathological findings than did PET results. In 8 patients (10%), PET detected distant metastases that were not identified with CT. In 4 patients (5%), PET detected bone metastases only, but in all of these patients metastases in other locations were detected by CT. Although PET led to upstaging (M1) in 2 patients (2%), it did not enable the exclusion of esophageal resection.

Conclusions  Preoperative PET was not characterized by greater accuracy in the detection of metastatic sites previously identified by CT. Therefore, PET did not lead to a change in the indication for esophagectomy. An increase in the sensitivity and the combined use of CT and PET may lead to new indications for this staging procedure.


From the Departments of General and Visceral Surgery (Drs Kneist and Junginger), Nuclear Medicine (Drs Schreckenberger and Bartenstein), and Radiology (Dr Oberholzer), Hospital of the Johannes Gutenberg-University, Mainz, Germany; and the Department of Nuclear Medicine, Hospital of the Johann Wolfgang Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany (Dr Menzel).


RELATED ARTICLE

This Month in Archives of Surgery
Arch Surg. 2004;139(10):1040.
FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Additional Value of PET/CT over PET in Assessment of Locoregional Lymph Nodes in Thoracic Esophageal Squamous Cell Cancer
Yuan et al.
JNM 2006;47:1255-1259.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Preoperative (18)[F]-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography Standardized Uptake Values Predict Survival After Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Resection.
Rizk et al.
Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2006;81:1076-1081.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2004 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.