Background: Rectal tumor treatment strategies are individually tailored based on tumor stage, and yield different rates of posttreatment morbidity, mortality, and local recurrence. Therefore, the accuracy of pretreatment staging is highly important. Here we investigated the accuracy of staging by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and endorectal ultrasound (ERUS) in a clinical setting. Material and methods: A total of 500 patients were examined at the rectal cancer outpatient clinic at Haukeland University Hospital between October 2014 and January 2018. This study included only cases in which the resection specimen had a histopathological staging of adenoma or early rectal cancer (pT1-pT2). Patients with previous pelvic surgery or preoperative radiotherapy were excluded. The 145 analyzed patients were preoperatively examined via biopsy (n ¼ 132), digital rectal examination (n ¼ 77), rigid rectoscopy (n ¼ 127), ERUS (n ¼ 104), real-time elastography (n ¼ 96), and MRI (n ¼ 84). Results: ERUS distinguished between adenomas and early rectal cancer with 88% accuracy (95% CI: 0.68-0.96), while MRI achieved 75% accuracy (95% CI: 0.54-0.88). ERUS tended to overstage T1 tumors as T2-T3 (16/24). MRI overstaged most adenomas to T1-T2 tumors (18/22). Neither ERUS nor MRI distinguished between T1 and T2 tumors. Conclusions: In a clinical setting, ERUS differentiated between benign and malignant tumors with high accuracy. The present findings support previous reports that ERUS and MRI have low accuracy for T-staging of early rectal cancer. We recommend that MRI be routinely combined with ERUS for the clinical examination of rectal tumors, since MRI consistently overstaged adenomas as cancer. In adenomas, MRI had no additional benefit for preoperative staging.
AimStrain elastography is a method for recording tissue hardness. Strain in different areas may be compared using strain ratio (SR). The aims of this study were to validate a previously proposed SR cut-off value of 1.25 for differentiating adenocarcinomas from adenomas and to compare the performance of endorectal ultrasonography (ERUS), strain elastography and MRI in the same patients.MethodA prospective evaluation of 120 consecutive patients with rectal neoplasia, using a predetermined elastography strain ratio cut-off value, was performed to differentiate adenomas from adenocarcinomas. ERUS and MRI were performed according to standard routine at Haukeland University Hospital, defining T0 as adenomas and T1–T4 as adenocarcinomas. Subsequent histopathology was used as the reference standard.ResultsHistopathological evaluation revealed 21 adenomas and 99 adenocarcinomas. Sensitivity, specificity and accuracy (with 95% CI) were as follows: ERUS: 0.96 (0.90–0.99), 0.62 (0.40–0.80) and 0.90 (0.83–0.94); elastography SR: 0.96 (0.90–0.99), 0.86 (0.66–0.96) and 0.94 (0.88–0.97); and MRI: 0.99 (0.94–1.00), 0.07 (0.00–0.31) and 0.87 (0.80–0.93).ConclusionThis study confirms that the elastography SR assessment accurately differentiates sessile adenomas from adenocarcinomas. SR assessment has a superior ability to differentiate adenomas and adenocarcinomas when compared with ERUS and MRI. MRI examination seems unable to recognize adenomas and should be interpreted with care when early-stage rectal neoplasia is suspected.
Patients older than 80 years develop anal cancer, but more often marginal tumors. Even in the oldest age group half of the patients can tolerate standard treatment by a combination of radiation and chemotherapy, and obtain a relative survival of 50% after five years. Fragile patients not considered candidates for chemoradiation may be offered radiation or resection to control local disease.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.