Cargando…

Routine contrast-enhanced CT is insufficient for TNM-staging of duodenal adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE: Adequate TNM-staging is important to determine prognosis and treatment planning of duodenal adenocarcinoma. Although current guidelines advise contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) for staging of duodenal adenocarcinoma, literature about diagnostic tests is sparse. METHODS: In this retrospective sing...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Litjens, G., van Laarhoven, C. J. H. M., Prokop, M., van Geenen, E. J. M., Hermans, J. J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9463261/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35864264
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00261-022-03589-z
_version_ 1784787358616387584
author Litjens, G.
van Laarhoven, C. J. H. M.
Prokop, M.
van Geenen, E. J. M.
Hermans, J. J.
author_facet Litjens, G.
van Laarhoven, C. J. H. M.
Prokop, M.
van Geenen, E. J. M.
Hermans, J. J.
author_sort Litjens, G.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Adequate TNM-staging is important to determine prognosis and treatment planning of duodenal adenocarcinoma. Although current guidelines advise contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) for staging of duodenal adenocarcinoma, literature about diagnostic tests is sparse. METHODS: In this retrospective single-center cohort study, we analyzed the real life performance of routine CECT for TNM-staging and the assessment of resectability of duodenal adenocarcinoma. Intraoperative findings and pathological staging served as reference standard for resectability, T-, and N-staging. Biopsies, (18)FDG-PET-CT, and follow-up were used as the reference standard for M-staging. RESULTS: Fifty-two consecutive patients with duodenal adenocarcinoma were included, 26 patients underwent resection. Half of the tumors were isodense to normal duodenum on CECT. The tumor was initially missed in 7/52 patients (13%) on CECT. The correct T-stage was assigned with CECT in 14/26 patients (54%), N-stage in 11/26 (42%), and the M-stage in 42/52 (81%). T-stage was underestimated in (27%). The sensitivity for detecting lymph node metastases was only 24%, specificity was 78%. Seventeen percent of patients had indeterminate liver or lung lesions on CECT. Surgery with curative intent was started in 32 patients, but six patients (19%) could not be resected due to unexpected local invasion or metastases. CONCLUSION: Radiologists and clinicians have to be aware that routine CECT is insufficient for staging and determining resectability in patients with duodenal adenocarcinoma. CECT underestimates T-stage and N-stage, and M-stage is often unclear, resulting in futile surgery in 19% of patients. Alternative strategies are required to improve staging of duodenal adenocarcinoma. We propose to combine multiphase hypotonic duodenography CT with MRI.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9463261
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94632612022-09-11 Routine contrast-enhanced CT is insufficient for TNM-staging of duodenal adenocarcinoma Litjens, G. van Laarhoven, C. J. H. M. Prokop, M. van Geenen, E. J. M. Hermans, J. J. Abdom Radiol (NY) Hollow Organ GI PURPOSE: Adequate TNM-staging is important to determine prognosis and treatment planning of duodenal adenocarcinoma. Although current guidelines advise contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) for staging of duodenal adenocarcinoma, literature about diagnostic tests is sparse. METHODS: In this retrospective single-center cohort study, we analyzed the real life performance of routine CECT for TNM-staging and the assessment of resectability of duodenal adenocarcinoma. Intraoperative findings and pathological staging served as reference standard for resectability, T-, and N-staging. Biopsies, (18)FDG-PET-CT, and follow-up were used as the reference standard for M-staging. RESULTS: Fifty-two consecutive patients with duodenal adenocarcinoma were included, 26 patients underwent resection. Half of the tumors were isodense to normal duodenum on CECT. The tumor was initially missed in 7/52 patients (13%) on CECT. The correct T-stage was assigned with CECT in 14/26 patients (54%), N-stage in 11/26 (42%), and the M-stage in 42/52 (81%). T-stage was underestimated in (27%). The sensitivity for detecting lymph node metastases was only 24%, specificity was 78%. Seventeen percent of patients had indeterminate liver or lung lesions on CECT. Surgery with curative intent was started in 32 patients, but six patients (19%) could not be resected due to unexpected local invasion or metastases. CONCLUSION: Radiologists and clinicians have to be aware that routine CECT is insufficient for staging and determining resectability in patients with duodenal adenocarcinoma. CECT underestimates T-stage and N-stage, and M-stage is often unclear, resulting in futile surgery in 19% of patients. Alternative strategies are required to improve staging of duodenal adenocarcinoma. We propose to combine multiphase hypotonic duodenography CT with MRI. Springer US 2022-07-21 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9463261/ /pubmed/35864264 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00261-022-03589-z Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Hollow Organ GI
Litjens, G.
van Laarhoven, C. J. H. M.
Prokop, M.
van Geenen, E. J. M.
Hermans, J. J.
Routine contrast-enhanced CT is insufficient for TNM-staging of duodenal adenocarcinoma
title Routine contrast-enhanced CT is insufficient for TNM-staging of duodenal adenocarcinoma
title_full Routine contrast-enhanced CT is insufficient for TNM-staging of duodenal adenocarcinoma
title_fullStr Routine contrast-enhanced CT is insufficient for TNM-staging of duodenal adenocarcinoma
title_full_unstemmed Routine contrast-enhanced CT is insufficient for TNM-staging of duodenal adenocarcinoma
title_short Routine contrast-enhanced CT is insufficient for TNM-staging of duodenal adenocarcinoma
title_sort routine contrast-enhanced ct is insufficient for tnm-staging of duodenal adenocarcinoma
topic Hollow Organ GI
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9463261/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35864264
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00261-022-03589-z
work_keys_str_mv AT litjensg routinecontrastenhancedctisinsufficientfortnmstagingofduodenaladenocarcinoma
AT vanlaarhovencjhm routinecontrastenhancedctisinsufficientfortnmstagingofduodenaladenocarcinoma
AT prokopm routinecontrastenhancedctisinsufficientfortnmstagingofduodenaladenocarcinoma
AT vangeenenejm routinecontrastenhancedctisinsufficientfortnmstagingofduodenaladenocarcinoma
AT hermansjj routinecontrastenhancedctisinsufficientfortnmstagingofduodenaladenocarcinoma