These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Prospective comparison of hydrosonography, endosonography and specimen sonography for TN staging of gastric carcinoma].
    Author: Schipp A, Grenacher L, Kuntz C, Lubienski A, Scheller D, Kauffmann GW, Düx M.
    Journal: Rofo; 2002 Oct; 174(10):1274-80. PubMed ID: 12375202.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To compare hydrosonography (HUS), endosonography (EUS) and experimental sonography (PUS) with respect to TN-staging accuracy of gastric carcinoma. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-six patients with gastric carcinoma underwent EUS (7.5/12 MHz transducer, Olympus GF-UM 20) and HUS (3.75 MHz transducer, Toshiba, Sonolayer SSA-270A) for TN-staging according to the UICC-classification. The resected specimens were reexamined (3.75/7.5 MHz transducer) and again TN-staging was performed. Findings were correlated with histopathological results. RESULTS: T- and N-staging accuracies were as follows: EUS 54 % (19/35) and 79 % (27/34); HUS 41 % (15/37) and 61 % (22/36); and PUS 51 % (19/37) and 72 %(26/36). Sensitivities and specificities for the detection of lymph node metastases were as follows: EUS 87 % and 54 %; HUS 57 % and 69 %; and PUS 83 % and 54 %. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of sonographic TN- staging is limited in patients with gastric carcinoma. Nevertheless, EUS may contribute to the preoperative management of patients with gastric carcinoma if indications are well defined. HUS is not suited for TN-staging of gastric carcinoma.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]