Endosonography Overestimates Preoperative Staging of Primarily Resectable Esophageal Cancer Compared to Pathological T and N Status.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Aram Abu Hejleh, Julia Buttermann, Sonja Lang, Karl Knipper, Nikolai Schleußner, Hans Schlößer, Hans Fuchs, Philipp Kasper, Thomas Schmidt, Alexander Quaas, Christiane Bruns, Jin-On Jung, Seung-Hun Chon
{"title":"Endosonography Overestimates Preoperative Staging of Primarily Resectable Esophageal Cancer Compared to Pathological T and N Status.","authors":"Aram Abu Hejleh, Julia Buttermann, Sonja Lang, Karl Knipper, Nikolai Schleußner, Hans Schlößer, Hans Fuchs, Philipp Kasper, Thomas Schmidt, Alexander Quaas, Christiane Bruns, Jin-On Jung, Seung-Hun Chon","doi":"10.1177/10926429261490767","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Accurate preoperative staging of esophageal carcinoma guides the choice between neoadjuvant therapy and primary surgery. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) remains the principal modality for locoregional staging, yet its accuracy varies. We evaluated EUS diagnostic performance against final pathology in a homogeneous cohort undergoing primary esophagectomy at a high-volume center and identified factors influencing its reliability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective analysis included 295 patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (78%) or squamous cell carcinoma (22%) who underwent oncological esophagectomy between 2006 and 2017, primarily without neoadjuvant therapy. Preoperative uTNM staging by EUS was compared with pathological pTNM. Predictors of staging concordance were assessed by multivariate logistic regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall T-stage accuracy was 57.2%. EUS correctly identified 85.9% of pT1 tumors but only 17.0% of pT2 and 64.6% of pT3 lesions. Tumors were overstaged in 36.6% and understaged in 6.1% of cases. Nodal staging accuracy was 65.8% (sensitivity 65%, specificity 68%). Younger age, female sex, shorter height, and ASA II status were independent predictors of reduced T-stage accuracy; no significant predictors emerged for N-stage.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>EUS accurately detects early-stage esophageal cancer but shows limited reliability for intermediate stages, particularly pT2 tumors, in this single-center study. Given the risk of misclassification, EUS findings should be interpreted cautiously and complemented by additional diagnostic tools to improve preoperative assessment and enable individualized treatment decisions.</p>","PeriodicalId":50166,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques","volume":" ","pages":"10926429261490767"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10926429261490767","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Accurate preoperative staging of esophageal carcinoma guides the choice between neoadjuvant therapy and primary surgery. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) remains the principal modality for locoregional staging, yet its accuracy varies. We evaluated EUS diagnostic performance against final pathology in a homogeneous cohort undergoing primary esophagectomy at a high-volume center and identified factors influencing its reliability.

Methods: This retrospective analysis included 295 patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (78%) or squamous cell carcinoma (22%) who underwent oncological esophagectomy between 2006 and 2017, primarily without neoadjuvant therapy. Preoperative uTNM staging by EUS was compared with pathological pTNM. Predictors of staging concordance were assessed by multivariate logistic regression.

Results: Overall T-stage accuracy was 57.2%. EUS correctly identified 85.9% of pT1 tumors but only 17.0% of pT2 and 64.6% of pT3 lesions. Tumors were overstaged in 36.6% and understaged in 6.1% of cases. Nodal staging accuracy was 65.8% (sensitivity 65%, specificity 68%). Younger age, female sex, shorter height, and ASA II status were independent predictors of reduced T-stage accuracy; no significant predictors emerged for N-stage.

Conclusion: EUS accurately detects early-stage esophageal cancer but shows limited reliability for intermediate stages, particularly pT2 tumors, in this single-center study. Given the risk of misclassification, EUS findings should be interpreted cautiously and complemented by additional diagnostic tools to improve preoperative assessment and enable individualized treatment decisions.

与病理T和N状态相比,超声检查高估了主要可切除食管癌的术前分期。
背景:准确的食管癌术前分期指导着新辅助治疗和原发性手术的选择。内镜超声(EUS)仍然是局部区域分期的主要方式,但其准确性各不相同。我们在一个大容量中心对一个同质队列进行初级食管切除术的EUS诊断结果与最终病理进行了评估,并确定了影响其可靠性的因素。方法:本回顾性分析包括295例2006年至2017年期间接受肿瘤食管切除术的食管腺癌(78%)或鳞状细胞癌(22%)患者,主要未接受新辅助治疗。术前EUS与病理pTNM分期进行比较。通过多变量逻辑回归评估分期一致性的预测因素。结果:总t期准确率为57.2%。EUS对pT1肿瘤的正确率为85.9%,但对pT2和pT3病变的正确率分别为17.0%和64.6%。36.6%的病例表现为过舞台,6.1%的病例表现为过舞台。淋巴结分期准确率为65.8%(敏感性65%,特异性68%)。年龄较小、女性、较矮的身高和ASA II状态是t期准确性降低的独立预测因素;n期未出现显著的预测因子。结论:在这项单中心研究中,EUS能准确检测早期食管癌,但对中期食管癌,尤其是pT2期食管癌的检测可靠性有限。考虑到误分类的风险,应谨慎解释EUS检查结果,并辅以额外的诊断工具,以改善术前评估和制定个性化的治疗决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
163
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques (JLAST) is the leading international peer-reviewed journal for practicing surgeons who want to keep up with the latest thinking and advanced surgical technologies in laparoscopy, endoscopy, NOTES, and robotics. The Journal is ideally suited to surgeons who are early adopters of new technology and techniques. Recognizing that many new technologies and techniques have significant overlap with several surgical specialties, JLAST is the first journal to focus on these topics both in general and pediatric surgery, and includes other surgical subspecialties such as: urology, gynecologic surgery, thoracic surgery, and more.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书