A comparison between intrarectal ultrasound and CT scanning in staging of experimental rectal tumors

A. Senagore, J. W. Milsom, P. Senagore, W. P. Mazier, D. J. Scholten, P. Zydbel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of preoperative staging of experimental rectal tumors by digital rectal exam, intrarectal ultrasound (IRUS), and CT scanning with pathologic exam. Rectal tumor masses were induced in 10 mongrel dogs by submucosal injection of 2-3 cc of Freund's complete adjuvant. One week later, the animals underwent digital rectal exam, IRUS, and pelvic CT scans. Pelvic exenteration specimens were submitted for pathologic evaluation. Evaluations and interpretations were done in blinded fashion by independent examiners. The rectal "tumor" was detected in 9 of 10 digital exams, 10 of 10 IRUS exams, and 1 of 10 CT scans. Correct Duke's staging occurred in 70% of digital exams, 90% of IRUS exams, and 10% of CT exams compared to pathological staging. Lymph nodes were detected on pathologic exam in all animals (8.7/animal, range 3-16), on IRUS in all animals (6.4/animal, range 5-13), and in none of the digital or CT examinations. IRUS was significantly more accurate in detecting (P <0.0001) and locally staging tumors (P <0.0001), and in detecting and localizing lymphadenopathy compared to CT scan. Intrarectal ultrasound is a simple, highly accurate device for assessing depth of wall penetration of rectal tumors and in detecting pararectal lymph nodes and should be considered the preoperative staging procedure of choice for rectal cancer.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)522-526
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Surgical Research
Volume44
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - 1988
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Rectal Neoplasms
Lymph Nodes
Pelvic Exenteration
Preoperative Care
Freund's Adjuvant
Neoplasm Staging
Dogs
Equipment and Supplies
Injections

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

Senagore, A., Milsom, J. W., Senagore, P., Mazier, W. P., Scholten, D. J., & Zydbel, P. (1988). A comparison between intrarectal ultrasound and CT scanning in staging of experimental rectal tumors. Journal of Surgical Research, 44(5), 522-526. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-4804(88)90157-6

A comparison between intrarectal ultrasound and CT scanning in staging of experimental rectal tumors. / Senagore, A.; Milsom, J. W.; Senagore, P.; Mazier, W. P.; Scholten, D. J.; Zydbel, P.

In: Journal of Surgical Research, Vol. 44, No. 5, 1988, p. 522-526.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Senagore, A, Milsom, JW, Senagore, P, Mazier, WP, Scholten, DJ & Zydbel, P 1988, 'A comparison between intrarectal ultrasound and CT scanning in staging of experimental rectal tumors', Journal of Surgical Research, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 522-526. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-4804(88)90157-6
Senagore, A. ; Milsom, J. W. ; Senagore, P. ; Mazier, W. P. ; Scholten, D. J. ; Zydbel, P. / A comparison between intrarectal ultrasound and CT scanning in staging of experimental rectal tumors. In: Journal of Surgical Research. 1988 ; Vol. 44, No. 5. pp. 522-526.
@article{4292cbbe4f9e4218927c94a89ceb674e,
title = "A comparison between intrarectal ultrasound and CT scanning in staging of experimental rectal tumors",
abstract = "The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of preoperative staging of experimental rectal tumors by digital rectal exam, intrarectal ultrasound (IRUS), and CT scanning with pathologic exam. Rectal tumor masses were induced in 10 mongrel dogs by submucosal injection of 2-3 cc of Freund's complete adjuvant. One week later, the animals underwent digital rectal exam, IRUS, and pelvic CT scans. Pelvic exenteration specimens were submitted for pathologic evaluation. Evaluations and interpretations were done in blinded fashion by independent examiners. The rectal {"}tumor{"} was detected in 9 of 10 digital exams, 10 of 10 IRUS exams, and 1 of 10 CT scans. Correct Duke's staging occurred in 70{\%} of digital exams, 90{\%} of IRUS exams, and 10{\%} of CT exams compared to pathological staging. Lymph nodes were detected on pathologic exam in all animals (8.7/animal, range 3-16), on IRUS in all animals (6.4/animal, range 5-13), and in none of the digital or CT examinations. IRUS was significantly more accurate in detecting (P <0.0001) and locally staging tumors (P <0.0001), and in detecting and localizing lymphadenopathy compared to CT scan. Intrarectal ultrasound is a simple, highly accurate device for assessing depth of wall penetration of rectal tumors and in detecting pararectal lymph nodes and should be considered the preoperative staging procedure of choice for rectal cancer.",
author = "A. Senagore and Milsom, {J. W.} and P. Senagore and Mazier, {W. P.} and Scholten, {D. J.} and P. Zydbel",
year = "1988",
doi = "10.1016/0022-4804(88)90157-6",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "44",
pages = "522--526",
journal = "Journal of Surgical Research",
issn = "0022-4804",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison between intrarectal ultrasound and CT scanning in staging of experimental rectal tumors

AU - Senagore, A.

AU - Milsom, J. W.

AU - Senagore, P.

AU - Mazier, W. P.

AU - Scholten, D. J.

AU - Zydbel, P.

PY - 1988

Y1 - 1988

N2 - The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of preoperative staging of experimental rectal tumors by digital rectal exam, intrarectal ultrasound (IRUS), and CT scanning with pathologic exam. Rectal tumor masses were induced in 10 mongrel dogs by submucosal injection of 2-3 cc of Freund's complete adjuvant. One week later, the animals underwent digital rectal exam, IRUS, and pelvic CT scans. Pelvic exenteration specimens were submitted for pathologic evaluation. Evaluations and interpretations were done in blinded fashion by independent examiners. The rectal "tumor" was detected in 9 of 10 digital exams, 10 of 10 IRUS exams, and 1 of 10 CT scans. Correct Duke's staging occurred in 70% of digital exams, 90% of IRUS exams, and 10% of CT exams compared to pathological staging. Lymph nodes were detected on pathologic exam in all animals (8.7/animal, range 3-16), on IRUS in all animals (6.4/animal, range 5-13), and in none of the digital or CT examinations. IRUS was significantly more accurate in detecting (P <0.0001) and locally staging tumors (P <0.0001), and in detecting and localizing lymphadenopathy compared to CT scan. Intrarectal ultrasound is a simple, highly accurate device for assessing depth of wall penetration of rectal tumors and in detecting pararectal lymph nodes and should be considered the preoperative staging procedure of choice for rectal cancer.

AB - The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of preoperative staging of experimental rectal tumors by digital rectal exam, intrarectal ultrasound (IRUS), and CT scanning with pathologic exam. Rectal tumor masses were induced in 10 mongrel dogs by submucosal injection of 2-3 cc of Freund's complete adjuvant. One week later, the animals underwent digital rectal exam, IRUS, and pelvic CT scans. Pelvic exenteration specimens were submitted for pathologic evaluation. Evaluations and interpretations were done in blinded fashion by independent examiners. The rectal "tumor" was detected in 9 of 10 digital exams, 10 of 10 IRUS exams, and 1 of 10 CT scans. Correct Duke's staging occurred in 70% of digital exams, 90% of IRUS exams, and 10% of CT exams compared to pathological staging. Lymph nodes were detected on pathologic exam in all animals (8.7/animal, range 3-16), on IRUS in all animals (6.4/animal, range 5-13), and in none of the digital or CT examinations. IRUS was significantly more accurate in detecting (P <0.0001) and locally staging tumors (P <0.0001), and in detecting and localizing lymphadenopathy compared to CT scan. Intrarectal ultrasound is a simple, highly accurate device for assessing depth of wall penetration of rectal tumors and in detecting pararectal lymph nodes and should be considered the preoperative staging procedure of choice for rectal cancer.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0023943425&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0023943425&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/0022-4804(88)90157-6

DO - 10.1016/0022-4804(88)90157-6

M3 - Article

C2 - 3287004

AN - SCOPUS:0023943425

VL - 44

SP - 522

EP - 526

JO - Journal of Surgical Research

JF - Journal of Surgical Research

SN - 0022-4804

IS - 5

ER -