Accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography in diagnosing ascites and predicting peritoneal metastases in gastric cancer patients

Current perspectives on the diversification of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and biopsy

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) has undergone significant advancements since it was first reported in 1992. Initially focused on the pancreas, EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) has now been extended to encompass all organs proximal to the gastrointestinal system. Recently, a novel fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle with an end-cut tip was developed, allowing for the collection of specimens suitable for histological assessment, a feat hard to achieve with traditional needles. The FNB needle holds promise for applications in immunohistochemistry staining and genetics evaluation, and it has the potential to yield specimens of comparable quality to core needle biopsy during percutaneous puncture, especially for lesions beyond the pancreas, such as lymph nodes. This review focuses on the efficacy of EUS-FNA/FNB for extended target regions, specifically lymph nodes, spleen, adrenal gland, and ascites. The indications for EUS-FNA have greatly expanded beyond the pancreas over the years, and future improvements and innovations in puncture needles will allow for the collection of higher-quality specimens, which is expected to play a significant part in personalized cancer treatment.

Preoperative EUS vs. PET-CT Evaluation of Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy for Esophagogastric Cancer and Its Correlation with Survival

BACKGROUND

The objective of our study was to investigate whether Endoscopic Ultrasonography (EUS) and Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography (PET-CT) restaging can predict survival in upper gastrointestinal tract adenocarcinomas and to assess their accuracy when compared to pathology.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study on all patients who underwent EUS for staging of gastric or esophago-gastric junction adenocarcinoma between 2010 and 2021. EUS and PET-CT were performed, and preoperative TNM restaging was conducted using both procedures within 21 days prior to surgery. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 185 patients (74.7% male) were included in the study. The accuracy of EUS for distinguishing between T1-T2 and T3-T4 tumors after neoadjuvant therapy was 66.7% (95% CI: 50.3-77.8%), and for N staging, the accuracy was 70.8% (95% CI: 51.8-81.8%). Regarding PET-CT, the accuracy for N positivity was 60.4% (95% CI: 46.3-73%). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a significant correlation between positive lymph nodes on restaging EUS and PET-CT with DFS. Multivariate COX regression analysis identified N restaging with EUS and PET-CT, as well as the Charlson comorbidity index, as correlated factors with DFS. Positive lymph nodes on EUS and PET-CT were predictors of OS. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, the independent risk factors for OS were found to be the Charlson comorbidity index, T response by EUS, and male sex.

CONCLUSION

Both EUS and PET-CT are valuable tools for determining the preoperative stage of esophago-gastric cancer. Both techniques can predict survival, with preoperative N staging and response to neoadjuvant therapy assessed by EUS being the main predictors.

Diagnostic and interventional EUS in hepatology: An updated review

EUS has become an increasingly used diagnostic and therapeutic modality in the armamentarium of endoscopists. With ever-expanding indications, EUS is being used in patients with liver disease, for both diagnosis and therapy. EUS is playing an important role in providing additional important information to that provided by cross-sectional imaging modalities such as computerized tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Domains of therapy that were largely restricted to interventional radiologists have become accessible to endosonologists. From liver biopsy and sampling of liver lesions to ablative therapy for liver lesions and vascular interventions for varices, there is increased use of EUS in patients with liver disease. In this review, we discuss the various diagnostic and therapeutic applications of EUS in patients with various liver diseases.

Current and future imaging modalities in gastric cancer

Gastric adenocarcinoma treatment can include endoscopic mucosal resection, surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, and palliative measures depending on staging. Both invasive and noninvasive staging techniques have been used to dictate the best treatment pathway. Here, we review the current imaging modalities used in gastric cancer as well as novel techniques to accurately stage and screen these patients.

Role of therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound in gastrointestinal malignancy- current evidence and future directions

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has come a long way from a mere diagnostic tool to an advanced therapeutic modality. With the advent of better technologies and accessories, EUS has found ground in the management of gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies, not only for diagnosis but also for therapeutic purposes. EUS can tackle a host of conditions, including hepato-pancreatico-biliary malignancies. Advances and experience in various EUS-guided biliary drainage techniques have enabled the endosonologist to tackle biliary obstruction when conventional techniques of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and/or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) fails. More and more emerging data not only establishes the safety of EUS-BD but also demonstrates superior efficacy over PTBD and sometimes even ERCP. Malignant gastric outlet obstruction can now be safely managed with EUS-guided gastroenterostomy. Starting from pain management in malignant tumors through celiac plexus neurolysis to various tumor ablative therapies, EUS has forged ahead over percutaneous treatment or surgical options in the management of GI malignancies. Additional data is now coming up on the prospects of EUS-guided immunotherapy and biological therapy for tumor management. The future of EUS therapeutics in the field of GI malignancies is bright. With increasing evidence, this modality becoming a key player in management of a host of complex clinical conditions arising out of GI malignancies is in the offing. This review focuses on elucidating the role of therapeutic EUS in the management of GI malignancies, a synopsis of various techniques, data on its safety and efficacy as well as future advancements in this domain.

Role of endoscopic ultrasound in the field of hepatology: Recent advances and future trends

The role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) as a diagnostic and therapeutic modality for the management of various gastrointestinal diseases has been expanding. The imaging or intervention for various liver diseases has primarily been the domain of radiologists. With the advances in EUS, the domain of endosonologists is rapidly expanding in the field of hepatology. The ability to combine endoscopy and sonography in one hybrid device is a unique property of EUS, together with the ability to bring its probe/transducer near the liver, the area of interest. Its excellent spatial resolution and ability to provide real-time images coupled with several enhancement techniques, such as contrast-enhanced (CE) EUS, have facilitated the growth of EUS. The concept of “Endo-hepatology” encompasses the wide range of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures that are now gradually becoming feasible for managing various liver diseases. Diagnostic advancements can enable a wide array of techniques from elastography and liver biopsy for liver parenchymal diseases, to CE-EUS for focal liver lesions to portal pressure measurements for managing various liver conditions. Similarly, therapeutic advancements range from EUS-guided eradication of varices, drainage of bilomas and abscesses to various EUS-guided modalities of liver tumor management. We provide a comprehensive review of all the different diagnostic and therapeutic EUS modalities available for the management of various liver diseases. A synopsis of all the technical details involving each procedure and the available data has been tabulated, and the future trends in this area have been highlighted.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) from peritoneal lesions: a prospective cohort pilot study

Background

Diagnostic laparoscopy is often a necessary, albeit invasive, procedure to help resolve undiagnosed peritoneal diseases. Previous retrospective studies reported that EUS-FNA is feasible on peritoneal and omental lesions, however, EUS-FNA provided a limited amount of tissue for immunohistochemistry stain (IHC).

Aim

This pilot study aims to prospectively determine the effectiveness of EUS-FNB regarding adequacy of tissue for IHC staining, diagnostic rate and the avoidance rate of diagnostic laparoscopy or percutaneous biopsy in patients with these lesions.

Methods

From March 2017 to June 2018, patients with peritoneal or omental lesions identified by CT or MRI at the King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand were prospectively enrolled in the study. All Patients underwent EUS-FNB. For those with negative pathological results of EUS-FNB, percutaneous biopsy or diagnostic laparoscopy was planned. Analysis uses percentages only due to small sample sizes.

Results

A total of 30 EUS-FNB passes were completed, with a median of 3 passes (range 2–3 passes) per case. For EUS-FNB, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy of EUS-FNB from peritoneal lesions were 63.6%, 100%, 100%, 20% and 66.7% respectively. Adequate tissue for IHC stain was found in 25/30 passes (80%). The tissues from EUS results were found malignant in 7/12 patients (58.3%). IHC could be done in 10/12 patients (83.3%). Among the five patients with negative EUS results, two underwent either liver biopsy of mass or abdominal paracentesis, showing gallbladder cancer and adenocarcinoma. Two patients refused laparoscopy due to advanced pancreatic cancer and worsening ovarian cancer. The fifth patient had post-surgical inflammation only with spontaneous resolution. The avoidance rate of laparoscopic diagnosis was 58.3%. No major adverse event was observed.

Conclusions

EUS-FNB from peritoneal lesions provided sufficient core tissue for diagnosis and IHC. Diagnostic laparoscopy can often be avoided in patients with peritoneal lesions.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12876-021-01953-9.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy in patients with unexplained diffuse gastrointestinal wall thickening

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) is recommended after non-diagnostic biopsy in gastrointestinal wall thickening, although the performance of currently available FNB needles in this setting is unknown. We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy and safety of EUS-FNB and to evaluate the "T" wall staging in malignant pathology. Patients and methods  This was a single center retrospective study that included all consecutive patients undergoing EUS-FNB for diffuse gastrointestinal wall thickening with at least one previous negative conventional endoscopic biopsy between January 2016 and November 2019. EUS-FNB was performed using linear-array echoendoscopes with slow-pull/fanning technique. Tissue acquisition was done with 19- or 22-gauge biopsy needles. Samples were included in formalin without rapid on-site evaluation and submitted for histopathological processing. The final diagnosis was based on conclusive histology or absence of evidence of disease progression after follow-up at least 6 months. Results  Twenty-nine patients (21 men), with a median age of 68 (IQR: 56-77), were included. EUS-FNB was technically feasible and the sample quality was adequate for full histological assessment in all patients (100 %). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and overall accuracy for diagnosis of malignancy were 95.5 %, 100 %, 100 %, 83.3 %, and 96.3 %, respectively. In patients with malignant disease, the samples obtained allowed detection of signs of deep layer infiltration ("histological staging") in 17 of 21 cases (81 %). No adverse events were noted. Conclusions  The EUS-FNB technique demonstrated excellent diagnostic performance and safety in the study of unexplained diffuse gastrointestinal wall thickening. Histological staging was obtained in a high percentage of samples.

A Meta-Analysis And Systematic Review Of Accuracy Of Endoscopic Ultrasound For N Staging Of Gastric Cancers

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is widely used as a staging modality for gastric cancer. However, the results of studies on the use of EUS for N staging in gastric cancer vary. This study aimed at studying the overall diagnostic accuracy of EUS for N staging of gastric cancer.

METHODS

Published studies were identified through searching the MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, SpringerLink and ScienceDirect databases. A bivariate random effect model was used to estimate the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). A hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curves (HSROC) based on the pooled data was also computed.

RESULTS

Fifty studies (5223 patients) were included in this analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR and DOR of EUS for N staging were 0.82 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.85), 0.68 (0.63 to 0.73), 2.6 (2.2 to 3.0), 0.27 (0.22 to 0.32), and 10 (8 to 12), respectively. The area under the HSROC was 0.83.

CONCLUSION

The EUS may provide a clinically useful tool to guide physicians in the N staging of gastric cancer. However, physicians must note that the EUS has a relatively low specificity.

Diagnostic tests for preoperative staging of esophagogastric junction tumors: performance and evidence-based recomendations

Preoperative clinical staging is critical to select those patients whose disease is localized and may benefit from surgery with curative intent. Ideally, such staging should predict tumor invasion, lymphatic involvement and distant metastases. With the cTNM, we are able to select patients who could benefit from endoscopic resection, radical surgery or less radical treatment in patients with distant metastasis. The initial diagnosis of adenocarcinomas of the esophagogastric junction requires endoscopy with biopsies. For clinical staging, thoracoabdominal-pelvic CT scan, endoscopic ultrasound and PET or PET/CT are used. Other useful explorations are: barium swallow, endoscopic mucosal resection or endoscopic submucosal dissection (for assessment in initial stages) and staging laparoscopy. Once the resectability of the tumor has been established, the operability of the tumor should be assessed according to the patient's condition.

The Diagnostic and Prognostic Value of Digital Rectal Examination in Gastric Cancer Patients with Peritoneal Metastasis

Background: Peritoneal metastasis (PM) is the most common cause of death in gastric cancer (GC) patients. However, diagnosis of PM is still difficult in clinical practice. This study aimed to explore the diagnostic and prognostic value of digital rectal examination (DRE) in GC.

Methods: 247 GC patients with PM confirmed by operation were included. The diagnostic yield of DRE compared with computed tomography (CT) was calculated. In another group of 1330 cases receiving radical gastrectomy, 38 cases with DRE (+) postoperatively were analyzed to identify risk factors. A nomogram was constructed to predict postoperative DRE (+).

Results: The specificity, positive predictive value and positive likelihood ratio of DRE in diagnosis of PM was 99.8%, 91.2% and 58.4, higher than CT (97.6%, 64.9% and 10.4). Though the sensitivity of DRE (12.6%) was lower than CT (24.7%), 17 of 31 patients with DRE (+) could not be found by CT. Moreover, the overall survival of confirmed PM patients with DRE (+) (PM-DRE (+)) was much lower than PM-DRE (-) patients (P<0.001). In addition, the nomogram to predict postoperative DRE (+) had a bootstrap-corrected concordance index of 0.73 and was well calibrated.

Conclusions: GC patients with DRE (+) could be regarded as a special subtype of stage IV ones with poorer prognosis. Supply of palliative care and chemotherapy rather than unnecessary operation might be a better alternative for these patients. DRE was an effective supplement for CT and should be generally recommended for GC patients.

Imaging strategies in the management of gastric cancer: current role and future potential of MRI

Accurate preoperative staging of gastric cancer and the assessment of tumor response to neoadjuvant treatment is of importance for treatment and prognosis. Current imaging techniques, mainly endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), computed tomography (CT) and ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (¹⁸F-FDG PET), have their limitations. Historically, the role of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in gastric cancer has been limited, but with the continuous technical improvements, MRI has become a more potent imaging technique for gastrointestinal malignancies. The accuracy of MRI for T- and N-staging of gastric cancer is similar to EUS and CT, making MRI a suitable alternative to other imaging strategies. There is limited evidence on the performance of MRI for M-staging of gastric cancer specifically, but MRI is widely used for diagnosing liver metastases and shows potential for diagnosing peritoneal seeding. Recent pilot studies showed that treatment response assessment as well as detection of lymph node metastases and systemic disease might benefit from functional MRI (e.g. diffusion weighted imaging and dynamic contrast enhancement). Regarding treatment guidance, additional value of MRI might be expected from its role in better defining clinical target volumes and setup verification with MR-guided radiation treatment.

Double Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography in Preoperative T Staging of Gastric Cancer: A Comparison With Endoscopic Ultrasonography

Objective: To compare the precision of double contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (DCEUS) to endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in preoperative T staging of gastric cancers.

Methods: This retrospective study consisted of 158 pathologically confirmed gastric cancer patients. All patients underwent DCEUS (intravenous contrast-enhanced ultrasonography combined with oral contrast-enhanced ultrasonography) and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) preoperatively. The histopathological findings of resected specimens were compared with the results of DCEUS and EUS retrospectively.

Results: The accuracy of DCEUS and EUS in evaluating the T staging of gastric cancer were 82.3% (T1 62.5%,T2 84.4%,T3 87.9%,T4 91.3%) and 76.6% (T1 84.4%,T2 82.2%,T3 72.4%,T4 65.2%), respectively. There were no significant differences between the methods for the overall T staging accuracy (χ² = 1.569, P = 0.210). But EUS was superior to DCEUS for T1 stage (χ² = 3.925, P = 0.048) and DCEUS was superior to EUS for T3 stage (χ² = 4.393, P = 0.036) and T4 stage (χ² = 4.600, P = 0.032).

Conclusion: DCEUS is a convenient and noninvasive method with high precision, which can be used as the primary imaging technique for advanced gastric cancer T staging. In early gastric cancer, we should prefer EUS. Two methods are complementary for assessing tumor invasion depth of gastric cancer.

Is Accurate N - Staging for Gastric Cancer Possible?

Node stage (N stage) is of paramount importance for gastric cancer staging. Radiologically node status implies detection and characterization of suspect malignant lymph nodes. Clinically it might determine survival and alter therapeutic plans. A number of modalities, including computerized tomography, MRI, PET and endoscopic ultrasound are currently available. Using a multimodality strategy, accuracy ranges between 50-90% across various studies. Specificity and sensitivity varies with respect to method, number of positive lymph nodes, their location and other characteristics. Restaging after neoadjuvant therapy and staging of recurrence presents its own, particular challenges. Each method has its advantages and limitations and none of them alone is adequate enough for staging. While most of them are clinically well established, they are also active research topics. To overcome the aforementioned limitations a multidisciplinary, multimodality approach with emphasis on clinical staging and treatment plans is proposed.

Management of Malignant Bowel Obstruction Associated With GI Cancers

For many patients with GI malignancies, the seeding of the abdominal cavity with tumor cells, called peritoneal carcinomatosis, is a common mode of metastases and disease progression. Prognosis for patients with this aspect of their disease remains poor, with high disease-related morbidity and complications. Uniform and proven practices that provide optimal palliative care and quality of life for these patients are needed. The objective of this review is to critically assess the current literature regarding palliative strategies in the management of peritoneal carcinomatosis and associated symptoms in patients with advanced GI cancers. Despite encouraging results in the select population where cytoreductive surgery and intraperitoneal chemotherapy are indicated, the majority of patients who develop peritoneal carcinomatosis in the setting of GI cancers have poor prognosis, with malignant bowel obstruction representing a common terminal phase of their disease process. For all patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis, aggressive symptom control and early multimodality palliative care as further outlined should be sought.

Clinical significance of computed tomography-detected ascites in gastric cancer patients with peritoneal metastases

Patients with peritoneal metastases (PM) are generally considered incurable; therefore, the presence of PM is a critical factor in deciding between palliative surgery and curative resection as a therapeutic strategy. Previous studies have not determined the predictive value of ascites detected on computed tomography (CT) for the presence of PM. We aimed to analyze the factors that are associated with PM in patients with CT-detected ascites.A total of 2207 consecutive patients who were diagnosed with gastric cancer between 2004 and 2013 were identified. Eleven patients with liver cirrhosis or chronic renal insufficiency with ascites and 57 patients who received previous treatment were excluded. Ninety-eight patients who had definite evidence of distant metastasis or PM on CT and 64 patients who did not undergo surgery were excluded. A total of 91 patients were enrolled in the study to analyze the association between CT-detected ascites and surgically confirmed PM.Seventy-six patients underwent curative resection and 15 patients underwent palliative surgery. Twelve patients exhibited peritoneal seeding and 37 patients showed regional lymph node metastasis. Regional lymph node metastasis, advanced gastric cancer, undifferentiated pathology, and the amount of ascites were significantly associated with PM. Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified the amount of ascites to be an independent risk factor for the presence of PM.Regional lymph node metastasis, advanced gastric cancer, undifferentiated pathology, and the amount of ascites were associated with PM. The amount of ascites was found to be an independent risk factor for PM.

Diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasound for detection of pancreatic malignancy following an indeterminate multidetector CT scan: a systemic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has a dismal prognosis in part due to delayed diagnosis. Even with advances in cross-sectional imaging, small pancreatic malignancies can be missed. We sought to determine the performance of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in those without an obvious mass on multi-detector CT scan (MDCT), but with clinical suspicion for pancreatic malignancy.

METHODS

Multiple databases were systematically searched to identify studies that assessed the diagnostic performance of EUS after negative or inconclusive pancreatic protocol MDCT for detection of pancreatic malignancy when clinically suspected. A total of four studies met the inclusion criteria. The point estimates in each study were compared to the summary pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity with the aid of forest plots. Funnel plots and Egger's test were employed to evaluate possible publication bias.

RESULTS

EUS-guided fine needle aspiration was performed in all studies. EUS was performed in 206 subjects with a clinical suspicion of a pancreatic mass but with an indeterminate MDCT. A pancreatic mass (mean size 21 ± 1.2 mm) was identified in 70% (n = 144) of the subjects, and 42.2% (n = 87) were diagnosed with PDAC. The pooled estimates of EUS for diagnosing pancreatic malignancy in the setting of an indeterminate MDCT were a sensitivity of 85% (95% CI 69-94%), specificity of 58% (95% CI 40-74%), positive predictive value of 77% (69-84%), negative predictive value of 66% (95% CI 53-77%), and an accuracy of 75% (95% CI 67-82). The summary area under the ROC curve was 0.80 (95% CI 0.52-0.89). The funnel plots and Egger's test did not show a significant publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS

The yield of EUS is comparatively higher for the diagnosis of a pancreatic malignancy in patients with suspected cancer, but a non-diagnostic MDCT. Importantly, the majority of the lesions missed on CT represent PDAC, in which early diagnosis is essential.

Endoscopic ultrasonography can avoid unnecessary laparotomies in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma and undetected peritoneal carcinomatosis

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

To assess the relationship between the presence of ascites detected by endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent a EUS for preoperative staging of a pancreatic adenocarcinoma between 1998 and 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. The diagnosis of PC was confirmed by histopathology or peritoneal fluid cytology. The main outcome of the study was the relationship of ascites at EUS and PC in patients with pancreatic cancer. Secondarily, to evaluate the relationship between this finding and survival as well as the development of PC during follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 136 patients were included: 30 patients with local unresectable tumor or metastatic disease and 106 potentially-resectable candidates based on CT staging. EUS showed ascites in 27 (20%) patients, of whom 8 (29.6%) had PC. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy of ascites by EUS in the detection of PC in this group of patients were 67%, 85%, 30%, 96% and 83%, respectively. Ascites detected by EUS was the only independent predictive factor of PC with an OR of 11 (CI 95%: 3-40). The detection of ascites by EUS was associated with a shorter survival (median survival time 7,3 months; range 0-60 vs 14.2 months; range 0-140) (p = 0.018) and earlier development of PC during follow-up (median 3.2 months, range 1.4-18.1 vs 12.7 months, range 5.4-54.8; p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

The finding of ascites at EUS in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma is highly associated with PC and a poor outcome.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration from ascites and peritoneal nodules: A scoping review

The peritoneum is involved in many diseases such as primary malignancy (mesothelioma), infectious disease (tuberculosis), and disseminated malignancy (peritoneal carcinomatosis). The peritoneal disease may manifest as ascites and/or peritoneal masses or nodules. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), due to its ability to provide high-resolution images, has revolutionized the imaging and diagnosis of pancreaticobiliary diseases among other gastrointestinal conditions. EUS can not only help in imaging of various lesions close to the gastrointestinal lumen but also aspirate/biopsy them. We conducted a systematic search to identify published literature on the value of EUS in detection and diagnosis of peritoneal disorders. This review aims to summarize the available literature on the use of EUS-guided paracentesis and fine-needle aspiration from peritoneal nodules.

Role of endoscopic ultrasonography in TNM staging of gastric cancer

Gastric cancer is a common malignancy that has a poor prognosis and high mortality. Cancer staging is the optimal method for evaluating prognosis. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has been considered the first-choice imaging modality for regional staging of gastric cancer because different structural layers of the gastric wall show remarkable differences in their echogenic appearance. However, the results of recent studies about the accuracy of EUS for staging of gastric cancer are contradictory. The aim of this article is to review the role of EUS in preoperative TNM staging of gastric cancer.

Targeted treatment of liver metastasis from gastric cancer using specific binding peptide

Gastric cancer ranks the first in China among all gastrointestinal cancers in terms of incidence, and liver metastasis is the leading cause of death for patients with advanced gastric cancer. Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) is a cytokine commonly chosen as the target for gene therapy against cancers. The specific binding peptide pd20 of gastric cancer cells with a high potential for liver metastasis was fused with human TNF to obtain the pd20-TNF gene using DNA recombinant technique. The expression of the fusion protein was induced and the protein was purified. In vitro activity test showed that the fusion protein greatly improved the membrane permeability of liver cells in nude mice with liver metastasis from gastric cancer. The tumor implantation experiment in nude mice showed that the fusion protein effectively mitigated the cancer lesions. The results provide important clues for developing the drugs for targeted treatment of liver metastasis from gastric cancer.

Accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography for determination of tumor invasion depth in gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer (GC) is one the common lethal cancers in Iran. Detection of GC in the early stages would assesses to improve the survival of patients. In this study, we attempt to evaluate the accuracy of EUS in detection depth of invasion of GC among Iranian Patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study is a retrospective study of patients with pathologically confirmed GC. They underwent EUS before initiating the treatment. The accuracy of EUS and agreement between the two methods was evaluated by comparing pre treatment EUS finding with post operative histopathological results.

RESULTS

The overall accuracy of EUS for T and N staging was 67.9% and 75.47, respectively. Underestimation and overestimation was seen in 22 (14.2%) and 40 (25.6%) respectively. The EUS was more accurate in large tumors and the tumors located in the middle and lower parts of the stomach. The EUS was more sensitive in T3 staging. The values of weighted Kappa from the T and N staging were 0.53 and 0.66, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS is a useful modality for evaluating the depth of invasion of GC. The accuracy of EUS was higher if the tumor was located in the lower parts of the stomach and the size of the tumor was more than 3 cm. Therefore, judgments made upon other criteria evaluated in this study need to be reconsidered.

Detection of peritoneal carcinomatosis by EUS fine-needle aspiration: impact on staging and resectability (with videos)

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) greatly affects cancer staging and resectability.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the PC detection rate by using EUS and noninvasive imaging and to determine the impact on staging and resectability.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

SETTING

Single tertiary-care referral center.

PATIENTS

A prospectively maintained EUS database was reviewed to identify patients who underwent EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) of a peritoneal anomaly. Findings were compared with a strict criterion standard that incorporated cytohistologic, radiologic, and clinical data.

INTERVENTION

EUS-FNA of a peritoneal anomaly.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Safety and diagnostic yield.

RESULTS

Of 106 patients, a criterion standard was available in 98 (39 female patients; median age, 65 years). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of EUS-FNA versus CT/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was 91% versus 28%, 100% versus 85%, and 94% versus 47%, respectively. In newly diagnosed cancer patients, peritoneal FNA upstaged 17 patients (23.6%). Of 32 patients deemed resectable by pre-EUS CT/MRI, 15 (46.9%) were deemed unresectable based solely on peritoneal FNA. The odds of FNA changing the resectability status remained highly significant after adjustment for cancer type, time between CT/MRI and EUS-FNA, and the quality of CT/MRI. The malignant appearance of the peritoneal anomaly but not the presence of ascites on EUS predicted a positive FNA finding (odds ratio 2.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.23-5.4 and odds ratio 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.4-1.8, respectively). There were 3 adverse events among 4 patients. Two of the patients developed abdominal pain and one each hypertensive urgency and pancreatitis.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective design, single-center, bias toward EUS as a diagnostic test.

CONCLUSION

Peritoneal EUS-FNA appears to safely detect radiographically occult PC and improve cancer staging and patient care.

Pediatric gastric cancer presenting with massive ascites

Gastric adenocarcinoma is quite rare in children and as a result very little experience has been reported on with regards to clinical presentation, treatment and outcome. We describe the case of a 16-year-old boy presenting with abdominal fullness and poor appetite for 7 d. Sonography showed massive ascites and computed tomography imaging revealed the presence of gastric mucosa thickness with omentum caking. The diagnosis of gastric adenocarcinoma was biopsy-proven endoscopically. Despite gastric adenocarcinoma being quite rare in the pediatric patient population, we should not overlook the possibility of gastric adenocarcinoma when a child presents with distended abdomen and massive ascites.

Is endoscopic ultrasonography still the modality of choice in preoperative staging of gastric cancer?

The treatment option for gastric cancer is usually based on preoperative staging by imaging modalities. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and computed tomography (CT) have been used as the diagnostic modality of choice in preoperative staging of gastric cancer. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has been employed in several studies, and (¹⁸F) 2-Fluoro-2-deoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) has emerged as a new promising imaging modality. The purpose of this article is to provide summarized information on preoperative staging using EUS, multi-detector row CT (MDCT), MRI and PET for gastric cancer. In T staging, both EUS and MDCT show high accuracy. MRI seemed to have better performance, but the number of MRI studies is limited. FDG-PET is not able to properly evaluate the depth of invasion. In N staging, the diagnostic accuracy of EUS, MDCT and MRI is not sufficient. In preoperative M staging, MDCT and FDG-PET showed similar diagnostic accuracies. FDG-PET/CT fusion could be expected to show better performance in the future. Physicians should keep in mind that each diagnostic modality has advantages and limitations and choose an appropriate diagnostic strategy tailored for each patient.

Endoscopic ultrasound and paracentesis in the evaluation of small volume ascites in patients with intra-abdominal malignancies

The evaluation of ascites in patients with known or suspected malignancy is a critical aspect of preoperative staging. Endoscopic evaluation by ultrasound of low volume ascites and sampling of the ascitic fluid by endoscopic ultrasound guided paracentesis (EUS-P) is both a sensitive and specific modality for the determination of peritoneal implants, which is not only an important prognostic indicator but a crucial factor in determining treatment strategy. It is common practice to utilize EUS for gastrointestinal malignancies such as pancreatic or gastric masses, with the performance of paracentesis during the same procedure for the purpose of imaging the abnormality and possibly performing fine needle aspiration for biopsy of the neoplasm itself. However, given the ability of EUS-P to adequately sample even minimal ascites, detecting much smaller volumes than traditional computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging, EUS-P may be a useful modality for the standard metastatic workup of any newly diagnosed or suspected malignancy. In this “Field of Vision” commentary, we discuss the role of EUS-P, including the article by Suzuki et al reporting their experience with EUS-P using an automated spring-loaded needle device. We also review the utility of EUS-P for non-gastrointestinal malignancies, such as ovarian cancer, which has a high incidence of malignant ascites.

Identification and characterization of CDH1 germline variants in sporadic gastric cancer patients and in individuals at risk of gastric cancer

Objective

To screen and characterize germline variants for E-cadherin (CDH1) in non-hereditary gastric cancer (GC) patients and in subjects at risk of GC.

Methods

59 GCs, 59 first degree relatives (FDRs) of GC, 20 autoimmune metaplastic atrophic gastritis (AMAGs) and 52 blood donors (BDs) were analyzed for CDH1 by direct sequencing, structural modelling and bioinformatics. Functional impact on splicing was assessed for intronic mutations. E-cadherin/β-catenin immunohistochemical staining and E-cadherin mRNA quantification using RT-PCR were performed.

Results

In GCs, 4 missense variants (p.G274S; p.A298T; p.T470I; p.A592T), 1 mutation in the 5′UTR (−71C>G) and 1 mutation in the intronic IVS12 (c.1937-13T>C) region were found. First pathogenic effect of p.A298T mutation was predicted by protein 3D modelling. The novel p.G274S mutation showed a no clear functional significance. Moreover, first, intronic IVS12 (c.1937-13T>C) mutation was demonstrated to lead to an aberrant CDH1 transcript with exon 11 deletion. This mutation was found in 2 GCs and in 1 BD. In FDRs, we identified 4 variants: the polymorphic (p.A592T) and 3 mutations in untranslated regions with unidentified functional role except for the 5′UTR (−54G>C) that had been found to decrease CDH1 transcription. In AMAGs, we detected 2 alterations: 1 missense (p.A592T) and 1 novel variant (IVS1 (c.48+7C>T)) without effect on CDH1 splicing. Several silent and polymorphic substitutions were found in all the groups studied.

Conclusions

Overall our study improves upon the current characterization of CDH1 mutations and their functional role in GC and in individuals at risk of GC. Mutations found in untranslated regions and data on splicing effects deserve a particular attention like associated with a reduced E-cadherin amount. The utility of CDH1 screening, in addition to the identification of other risk factors, could be useful for the early detection of GC in subjects at risk (i.e. FDRs and AMAGs), and warrants further study.

[Significance of free perigastric fluid detected by echoendoscopy in patients with gastric cancer]

OBJECTIVES

To determine the diagnostic value of free perigastric fluid identified by echoendoscopy in patients with gastric cancer and to establish the factors related to the presence of peritoneal carcinomatosis in these patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We retrospectively included 100 patients with a histological diagnosis of gastric adenocarcinoma referred for echoendoscopy. A positive result was defined as the echoendoscopic identification of free perigastric fluid. This result was compared with the final study based on exploratory laparoscopy-laparotomy. The histological and endoscopic characteristics were compared with the final result.

RESULTS

Free perigastric fluid was found in 21 patients (21%). Among these, 15 (71%) showed peritoneal carcinomatosis, confirmed by laparoscopy (12 patients) or echoendoscopy-guided fine-needle-aspiration biopsy (three patients). In seven of the 79 patients (8%) not showing the presence of ascites, peritoneal implants were identified by exploratory laparoscopy-laparotomy. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and diagnostic accuracy of free fluid in the diagnosis of carcinomatosis was 68%, 92%, 71%, 91% and 87%, respectively. No histologic or endoscopic factors related to the malignancy of echoendoscopically-detected fluid were identified.

CONCLUSION

In patients with gastric cancer, free perigastric fluid identified by echoendoscopy is an important predictive factor of peritoneal carcinomatosis and may have significant implications in the management of these patients.

Prognostic relevance of gastric cancer staging by endoscopic ultrasound

BACKGROUND

Recent trials and guidelines have established the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable UICC stage II to IV gastric cancers. In this setting, preoperative staging is pivotal for correct patient selection. This cohort study was designed to assess the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and the ability to select correctly patients for neoadjuvant chemotherapy on the basis of survival outcome.

METHODS

Eighty-two consecutive Caucasian patients (46 male; median age 72 years) with gastric cancer underwent EUS staging and subsequent surgery without perioperative chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Patients were followed for a median of 800 days postoperatively. Pathology and EUS UICC and T stages were compared and evaluated as predictors of survival using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

The overall accuracy of EUS for UICC classification compared with pathology was 62 %, and the accuracy for delineation of UICC I was 89 %. For the therapeutically relevant differentiation of early gastric cancer (UICC stage I), EUS (mean survival, 2,298 days, R2 = 0.23) and pathology (2,461 days, R2 = 0.24) predicted survival equally well. Similar results were obtained for T staging by EUS (mean survival, 2,065 days for uT1/2, R2 = 0.24) or pathology (2,185 days, R2 = 0.22).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS identifies the low risk subgroup (uUICC stage I or uT1/2) with similar performance as pUICC stage I or stage pT1/2 in gastric cancer and very similar survival characteristics. EUS thus may be the noninvasive method of choice for preoperative selection of patients for immediate resection versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the utility of EUS for preoperative staging for gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Accurate preoperative staging is important in determining the appropriate treatment of gastric cancer. Recently, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has been introduced as a staging modality. However, reported test characteristics for EUS in gastric cancer vary. Our purpose in this study was to identify, synthesize, and evaluate findings from all articles on the performance of EUS in the preoperative staging of gastric cancer.

METHODS

Electronic literature searches were conducted using Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1 January 1998 to 1 December 2009. All search titles and abstracts were independently rated for relevance by a minimum of two reviewers. Meta-analysis for the performance of EUS was analyzed by calculating agreement (Kappa statistic), and pooled estimates of accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity for all EUS examinations, using histopathology as the reference standard. Subgroup analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-two articles met our inclusion criteria and were included in the review. EUS pooled accuracy for T staging was 75% with a moderate Kappa (0.52). EUS was most accurate for T3 disease, followed by T4, T1, and T2. EUS pooled accuracy for N staging was 64%, sensitivity was 74%, and specificity was 80%. There was significant heterogeneity between the included studies. Subgroup analyses found that annual EUS volume was not associated with EUS T and N staging accuracy (P = 0.836, 0.99, respectively).

CONCLUSION

EUS is a moderately accurate technique that seems to describe advanced T stage (T3 and T4) better than N or less advanced T stage. Stratifying by EUS annual volume did not affect EUS performance in staging gastric cancer.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in hollow viscus cancer

Accurate cancer staging is essential in patients with hollow viscus malignancy to decide therapeutic modalities. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is considered as the best modality for local staging of hollow viscus cancer. EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) is a minimally invasive and effective sampling method. EUS-FNA should be applied when positive diagnosis of malignancy can possibly change the choice of therapeutic options. EUS in conjunction with EUS-FNA can optimize stage-directed therapy which is helpful in selecting minimally invasive treatment option including endoscopic treatment and avoiding unnecessary surgery in advanced cases.

Imaging in assessing hepatic and peritoneal metastases of gastric cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Hepatic and peritoneal metastases of gastric cancer are operation contraindications. Systematic review to provide an overview of imaging in predicting the status of liver and peritoneum pre-therapeutically is essential.

METHODS

A systematic review of relevant literatures was performed in Pubmed/Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and the China Biological Medicine Databases. QUADAS was used for assessing the methodological quality of included studies and the bivariate model was used for this meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Totally 33 studies were included (8 US studies, 5 EUS studies, 22 CT studies, 2 MRI studies and 5 18F-FDG PET studies) and the methodological quality of included studies was moderate. The result of meta-analysis showed that CT is the most sensitive imaging method [0.74 (95% CI: 0.59-0.85)] with a high rate of specificity [0.99 (95% CI: 0.97-1.00)] in detecting hepatic metastasis, and EUS is the most sensitive imaging modality [0.34 (95% CI: 0.10-0.69) ] with a specificity of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.87-0.99) in detecting peritoneal metastasis. Only two eligible MRI studies were identified and the data were not combined. The two studies found that MRI had both high sensitivity and specificity in detecting liver metastasis.

CONCLUSION

US, EUS, CT and 18F-FDG PET did not obtain consistently high sensitivity and specificity in assessing liver and peritoneal metastases of gastric cancer. The value of laparoscopy, PET/CT, DW-MRI, and new PET tracers such as 18F-FLT needs to be studied in future.

EUS in the management of gastric cancer

In this review we summarize latest data on the role of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in the diagnosis and management of gastric carcinoma. Since its initial introduction in clinical practice, EUS has been considered a valuable tool for the diagnosis and locoregional staging of gastric cancer and a method of inarguable value for the assessment of gastric wall involvement and presence of infiltrated paragastric lymph nodes. Moreover, another application of EUS, i.e. its role in the assessment of early gastric cancer has come into focus, especially nowadays in the era of endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection. These topics, together with other aspects of EUS in gastric cancer are discussed. On the other hand, despite its indisputable value, EUS for gastric cancer evaluation is "threatened" nowadays by other modern cross-sectional imaging methods (including trans-abdominal ultrasound, CT, MRI and PET), whose quality has lately improved. A brief comparison between the available imaging methods, attempts to show that their role ismore complementary than competitive.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided paracentesis of ascitic fluid: a morphologic study with ultrasonographic correlation

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) has been widely used for the diagnosis of primary and metastatic gastrointestinal (GI) and non-GI malignancies. Few studies have been published to evaluate the accuracy and the cytologic features of EUS-guided paracentesis in the diagnosis and staging of malignant neoplasms.

METHODS

All EUS-guided paracenteses of ascitic fluid performed at the University of California Irvine Medical Center (UCIMC) from January 2003 to February 2006 were retrospectively retrieved. Corresponding EUS findings, cytology and histology slides, and follow-up information were reviewed.

RESULTS

One hundred one (101) cases were found. Two smears were submitted in 11 cases because of the scanty amount of fluid aspirated. In the remaining cases, 5 mL or less of fluid were aspirated in 56 patients, and, of 9 who had prior computed tomography (CT), ascitic fluid was not seen in 6. The cytologic diagnoses were as follows: 17 were positive for adenocarcinoma, 1 positive for metastatic small-cell carcinoma of the lung, 1 positive for diffuse large-cell lymphoma, 3 suspicious for adenocarcinoma, 1 suspicious for plasmacytoma, 4 atypical epithelial cells, and 74 negative. Cell block was available in 80 cases and immunohistochemical stains were performed in 71 cases to confirm the diagnosis. Six patients had peritoneal biopsy. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and diagnostic accuracy were 80%, 100%, 100%, 95%, and 96%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-guided paracentesis is a valuable aid in the cytologic diagnosis of malignant ascites. It is particularly useful when no abnormality is identified by CT.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic masses: the utility and impact on management of patients

OBJECTIVE

It is controversial whether endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is beneficial in all patients with suspected pancreatic cancer. The aim of this study was to assess diagnostic yield, safety and impact of EUS-FNA on management of patients with solid pancreatic mass.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic mass were enrolled. Gold standard for final diagnosis included histology from surgical resection. In patients without surgery, clinical evaluation methods and repeated imaging studies were used for the comparison of initial cytology and final diagnosis. Patients were followed-up prospectively focusing on subsequent treatment.

RESULTS

Among 207 enrolled patients, final diagnosis was malignant in 163 (78.6%) and benign in 44 (21.4%). The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of EUS-FNA in diagnosing pancreatic cancer were 92.6% (95% CI: 87.20-95.96), 88.6% (95% CI: 74.64-95.64) and 91.8% (95% CI: 87.24-94.81), respectively. No major and five (2.4%) minor complications occurred. Of 151 true-positive patients by EUS-FNA, 57 (37.7%) were surgically explored, of whom 28 (49.1%) underwent resection. Ten of 12 patients with false-negative cytology were explored based on detection of mass on EUS, of whom two had a delay due to false-negative cytology without curative treatment. From the whole study cohort, EUS-FNA had positive and negative impacts on subsequent management in 136 (65.7%) and 2 (0.9%) patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-FNA provides accurate diagnosis in 92% and has positive therapeutic impact in two-thirds of patients with solid pancreatic mass. Despite negative cytology, surgical exploration is recommended in clinical suspicion for pancreatic cancer and solid mass on EUS.

[Diagnostic imaging in oncology--evidence reviews for evidence based guidelines by the Agency of Quality for Medicine (ÄZQ)]

Within the context of the development of evidence-based oncology guidelines, the Agency for Quality in Medicine undertook evidence reviews for diagnostic imaging procedures. Systematic searches retrieved no randomised controlled trials, but only cohort studies and case series of mostly moderate quality. The identified studies provided only a restricted basis for the guideline recommendations as their validity was limited and only outcomes of diagnostic accuracy were examined. However, decision criteria for recommending diagnostic strategies significantly comprise judgements about required resources and availability of diagnostic imaging procedures. These criteria as well as patient out-comes were mostly implicit and should be explicated in future. In order to increase the relevance of evidence reviews for oncological diagnosis, high quality studies which examine resources and patient-centred outcomes for diagnostic strategies are required.

Survival in patients with pancreatic cancer after the diagnosis of malignant ascites or liver metastases by EUS-FNA

BACKGROUND

The expected survival after the EUS-FNA diagnosis of malignant ascites or liver metastases from pancreatic cancer is not known.

OBJECTIVE

To report overall and 1-year survival in these patients.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort series.

SETTING

Tertiary referral hospital.

PATIENTS

Consecutive subjects with newly diagnosed pancreatic cancer from June 1998 and March 2008 in whom EUS-FNA of the liver or ascitic fluid confirmed hepatic metastases or malignant ascites.

INTERVENTIONS

Calculation of survival after diagnosis by using the Social Security Death Index.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Survival after EUS-FNA diagnosis of stage IV pancreatic cancer.

RESULTS

EUS-FNA identified liver metastases and malignant ascites from primary pancreatic cancer in 75 and 13 patients, respectively, and all 88 died during follow-up. For all 88 patients, the 1-year survival rate and median survival were 3.4% (95% CI, 1.1%-10.4%) and 82 days (range 2-754 days), respectively. The 1-year survival rates for those with liver metastases (4.0% [95% CI, 1.3%-12.1%]) and for those with malignant ascites (0% [95% CI, 0-24.7%]) were similar (P = 1.0). The median survival for patients with liver metastases of 83 days (range 2-754 days) was similar to that for those with malignant ascites (64 days; range 2-153 days) (P = .13). No clinical variable considered predicted survival of more than, less than, or 3 months.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective series with variable treatment for malignancy.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with pancreatic cancer, identification of malignant ascites or liver metastases by EUS-FNA is associated with a very poor prognosis.

EUS-guided FNA of peritoneal carcinomatosis in patients with unknown primary malignancy

BACKGROUND

EUS-guided FNA is a well-recognized technique for sampling the pancreas, peri-intestinal lymph nodes, and mass lesions. The role of EUS-guided FNA in the diagnosis of peritoneal carcinomatosis has not been well studied.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine the feasibility and success in sampling lesions in the peritoneum suspicious for carcinomatosis without a primary source.

DESIGN

An observational study.

SETTING

A tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients who underwent EUS-guided FNA of peritoneal deposits.

RESULTS

During a span of 3 years, 4 patients underwent transgastric or transduodenal EUS-guided FNA of peritoneal lesions with a curvilinear echoendoscope. All of these lesions were imaged by abdominal CT scan. The EUS findings of the nodules appeared round, relatively hypoechoic to the surrounding tissue, but hyperechoic when compared with the surrounding low-volume ascites where the lesions floated. Four passes were performed per case, and the diagnosis was achieved on a median of 2 passes (range 1-4). All patients received intravenous antibiotics during the procedure. Two patients had metastatic adenocarcinoma, 1 patient had lymphoma, and 1 patient had metastatic breast carcinoma. Diagnostic laparoscopy/laparotomy was avoided in all patients. No complications, particularly peritonitis, were encountered.

LIMITATIONS

Observational study with a small sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

Transgastric or transduodenal EUS-guided FNA for peritoneal carcinomatosis is feasible and safe. In the setting of an unknown primary cancer, EUS-guided FNA facilitates acquisition of tissues for treatment allocation, thus avoiding the need for laparoscopy or laparotomy.

Endoscopic ultrasound can improve the selection for laparoscopy in patients with localized gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

The majority of newly diagnosed patients with gastric cancer have disease that is not resectable because of local extension or metastatic (M1) disease. Laparoscopy is a recommended staging evaluation to identify occult peritoneal metastatic disease. We determined if endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) could improve the selection of patients for laparoscopy.

STUDY DESIGN

Gastric cancer patients being screened for a preoperative chemotherapy clinical trial were prospectively examined. Patients underwent standard preoperative assessment. Those without obvious metastatic disease were referred for EUS and laparoscopy. EUS divided patients into risk categories for metastatic disease: low risk (T1-2, N0) and high risk (T3-4, N+, or both). Laparoscopy categories were M1 and M0. The ability of EUS to predict subradiographic peritoneal metastatic disease was evaluated.

RESULTS

Ninety-four patients were studied. The majority were EUS high risk (72%). Occult metastatic disease was identified in 19 patients, 18 of whom had high-risk EUS stage. The yields of identifying M1 disease by laparoscopy in EUS high- and low-risk patients were 25% (95% CI, 15% to 37%) and 4% (95% CI, 0.1% to 20%), respectively. The negative predictive value of low-risk EUS for laparoscopy and pathologic M0 was 96% (exact 95% CI, 80% to 100%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggested that laparoscopy can be avoided in patients with EUS early-stage gastric cancer. Patients with more advanced disease are at higher risk of occult peritoneal disease and require laparoscopy. Validation with greater numbers is warranted, but, based on these data, we propose a new staging algorithm allowing EUS low-risk patients to proceed directly to resection.

Outcome of unresected gastric cancer after laparoscopic diagnosis of peritoneal carcinomatosis

BACKGROUND

Most gastric adenocarcinomas in western countries are locally advanced, and these tumours are often associated with metastatic spread at the time of diagnosis. It is controversial whether palliative surgery can improve symptom control in gastric cancer patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the need of palliative procedures and survival in patients affected by gastric cancer with peritoneal carcinomatosis managed without resection. Methods and materials After standard preoperative staging, 160 patients were diagnosed with resectable gastric adenocarcinoma. Laparoscopy was performed in 107 patients (66.9%), finding peritoneal spread in 22 of them (21%). Seventeen of these patients were not submitted to any additional surgical procedure. Data regarding postoperative morbidity and mortality, need of endoscopic, percutaneous or surgical procedures to palliate symptoms, hospital stay and survival were collected. The same data were collected for the 6 non-resected patients who were diagnosed with carcinomatosis by laparotomy.

RESULTS

In the "laparoscopy alone" group, there were 2 minor complications and no postoperative mortality. Mean postoperative stay was 6 days. Eight patients had to be readmitted to hospital for symptoms derived from tumour progression, and 10 palliative endoscopic procedures were performed. Surgical interventions were not needed in any case. Mean survival was 11.5 months. Patients submitted only to laparotomy presented higher morbidity and mortality rates, with a longer postoperative stay and survival of less than 5 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic staging of gastric cancer can help to avoid unnecessary laparotomies. In patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis diagnosed by laparoscopy, nonsurgical treatment has low morbidity and mortality and permits good symptom relief with no shortening of survival.

Locoregional treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric cancer

The authors reviewed the natural history and the main features of the peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastric cancer briefly and analyzed the pertinent literature concerning the locoregional modalities for prevention and for treatment. Results of the web based voting by experts were also summarized. As regards the peritoneal perfusion with cytotoxic drugs with or without hyperthermia for preventing peritoneal carcinomatosis in high risk patients, there are some randomized clinical trials and one meta-analysis supporting a benefit of the procedure. However, disparity in methodology (drugs, dosage, duration of the treatment, addition of hyperthermia, etc.) precludes the adoption of a shared protocol to be used in the clinical practice in high risk patients. Once the peritoneal carcinomatosis is established, the approach reported in literature is the peritonectomy associated with hyperthermic perfusion. However, data supporting benefits are scanty, and limited to few centers with a specific experience in this field. With regard to the main questions addressed to the experts' panel and concerning the indications for treatment and methodology, there was a general consistency among the experts and agreement with the findings of the literature. The need for a large multicenter trial to confirm the benefit and risk of intraperitoneal chemotherapy was recognized by both the experts and the authors.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-detected low-volume ascites as a predictor of inoperability for oesophagogastric cancer

Background

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) can detect low-volume ascites (LVA) not apparent on computed tomography. The aim of this study was to assess the importance of LVA for management of patients with oesophagogastric (OG) cancer.

Methods

Patients with LVA were identified from a prospective OG cancer unit database between January 2002 and January 2006.

Results

Of 1118 patients staged with OG cancer, 802 had EUS. The incidence of LVA was 8·4 per cent overall but fell to 6·5 per cent when those with metastases on computed tomography were excluded. Only patients with gastric and OG junction carcinoma had LVA. Staging laparoscopy in the 21 patients with LVA revealed that 11 (52 per cent) were inoperable. The remainder had laparotomy and complete (R0) resection was possible in only five (50 per cent). In 106 patients who had staging laparoscopy after EUS without LVA, 37 (34·9 per cent) were inoperable and 56 of the remaining 69 (81 per cent) had R0 resection.

Conclusion

The presence of LVA on EUS is uncommon in patients with OG cancer but very important, being indicative of incurable disease in 76 per cent. This information will be helpful in counselling patients regarding management options and the low likelihood of potentially curative treatment.

How good is endoscopic ultrasound for TNM staging of gastric cancers? A meta-analysis and systematic review

AIM: To evaluate the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for staging of gastric cancers.

METHODS: Only EUS studies confirmed by surgery were selected. Only studies from which a 2 × 2 table could be constructed for true positive, false negative, false positive and true negative values were included. Articles were searched in Medline, Pubmed, Ovid journals, Cumulative index for nursing & allied health literature, International pharmaceutical abstracts, old Medline, Medline nonindexed citations, and Cochrane control trial registry. Two reviewers independently searched and extracted data. The differences were resolved by mutual agreement. 2 × 2 tables were constructed with the data extracted from each study. Meta-analysis for the accuracy of EUS was analyzed by calculating pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, and diagnostic odds ratio. Pooling was conducted by both the Mantel-Haenszel method (fixed effects model) and DerSimonian Laird method (random effects model). The heterogeneity of studies was tested using Cochran’s Q test based upon inverse variance weights.

RESULTS: Initial search identified 1620 reference articles and of these, 376 relevant articles were selected and reviewed. Twenty-two studies (n = 1896) which met the inclusion criteria were included in this analysis. Pooled sensitivity of T1 was 88.1% (95% CI: 84.5-91.1) and T2 was 82.3% (95% CI: 78.2-86.0). For T3, pooled sensitivity was 89.7% (95% CI: 87.1-92.0). T4 had a pooled sensitivity of 99.2% (95% CI: 97.1-99.9). For nodal staging, the pooled sensitivity for N1 was 58.2% (95% CI: 53.5-62.8) and N2 was 64.9% (95% CI: 60.8-68.8). Pooled sensitivity to diagnose distant metastasis was 73.2% (95% CI: 63.2-81.7). The P for chi-squared heterogeneity for all the pooled accuracy estimates was > 0.10.

CONCLUSION: EUS results are more accurate with advanced disease than early disease. If EUS diagnoses advanced disease, such as T4 disease, the patient is 500 times more likely to have true anatomic stage of T4 disease.