Imaging in the staging of pancreatic carcinoma: Status quo et quo vadis?;Bildgebende verfahren zum staging des pankreaskarzinoms: Status quo et quo vadis?

Medizinische Welt

Volumn 55, Issue 11-12, 2004, Pages 410-414

  Bangerter, M ^a   Brudler, O ^a   Heinrich, B ^a   Algul H ^b   Schmid, R ^b  

^a Hamatologisch Onkologische Praxis A ^*  (Germany)

^b TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

Author keywords

Non invasive imaging methods; Pancreatic carcinoma; Staging

Indexed keywords

ANGIOGRAPHY; CANCER STAGING; CANCER SURGERY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DISEASE SEVERITY; ENDOSCOPIC ECHOGRAPHY; ENDOSCOPIC RETROGRADE CHOLANGIOPANCREATOGRAPHY; HUMAN; IMAGING; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PANCREAS CARCINOMA; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; REVIEW; TRANSABDOMINAL ULTRASOUND; ULTRASOUND;

EID: 11144316828     PISSN: 00258512     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (75)

1. Wingo PA et al. Cancer Statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 1995; 45: 8-30.
2. Fernandes E et al. Trends in pancreatic cancer mortality in Europe, 1955-1989. Int J Cancer 1994; 57: 786-92.
3. Bramhall SR et al. Incidence, treatment and survival in 13,560 patients with pancreatic cancer: An epidemiological study in the West Midlands. Br J Surg 1995; 82: 111-5.
4. Warshaw AL et al. Pancreatic carcinoma. N Engl J Med 1992; 326: 455-65.
5. Ries LAG et al. SEER Cancer Statistics Review: Tables and Graphs - NCI, Bethesda, MD, NIH 1994.
6. Trede M et al. Survival after pancreatoduodenectomy: 118 consecutive resections without an operative mortality. Ann Surg 1990; 211: 447-58.
7. Rosenberg JM et al. Cancer of the head of the pancreas: an institutional review with emphasis on surgical therapy: J Surg Oncol 1985; 28: 217-21.
8. Connonlly MM. Survival in 1001 patients with carcinoma of the pancreas. Ann Surg 1987; 206: 366-73.
9. Röthlin M. Braucht jeder Patient mit Pankreasleiden eine Ultraschalluntersuchung? Swiss Surg 2000; 6: 211-5.
10. Böttger T et al. Preoperative diagnostics in pancreatic carcinoma: would less be better? Langenbeck's Arch Surg 1998; 383: 243-8.
11. Palazzo L et al. Endoscopic ultrasonography in adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. Results of a prospective study with comparison to ultrasonography and CT scan. Endoscopy 1993; 25: 143-50.
12. Yasuda K et al. Endoscopic ultrasonography diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 1995; 5: 699-712.
13. Böttger TC et al. Diagnosing and staging of pancreatic carcinoma - What is necessary? Oncology 1998; 55: 122-9.
14. Angeli E et al. Color doppler imaging in the assessment of vascular involvement by pancreatic carcinoma. AJR 1997; 168: 193-7.
15. Erickson RA, Garza AA. Impact of endoscopic ultrasound on the managment and outcome of pancreatic carcinoma. Am J Gastroenterol 2000; 95: 2248-54.
16. Gress FG et al. Role of EUS in the preoperative staging of pancreatic cancer: a large single center experience. Gastrointest Endosc 1999; 50: 786-91.
17. Ahmad NA et al. Endosonography is superior to angiography in the preoperative assessment of vascular involvement among patients with pancreatic carcinoma. J Clin Gastroentreol 2001; 32: 54-8.
18. Brugge WR et al. The use of EUS to diagnose malignant portal venous system invasion by pancreatic cancer. Gastrointest Endosc 1996; 43: 561-7.
19. Rösch T et al. Staging of pancreatic and ampullary carcinoma by endoscopic ultrasonography. Comparison with conventional ultrasonography, computed tomography, and angiography. Gastroenterology 1992; 102: 188-99.
20. Snady H et al. Endoscopic ultrasonographic criteria of vascular invasion by potentially resectable pancreatic tumors. Gastrointest Endosc 1994; 40: 326-33.
21. Mertz HR et al. EUS, PET, and CT scanning for evaluation of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Gastrointest Endosc 2000; 52: 367-71.
22. Ahmad NA et al. Role of endoscopic ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging in the preoperative staging of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Am J Gastroenterol 2000; 95: 1926-31.
23. Powis ME, Chang KJ. Endoscopic ultrasound in the clinical staging and management of pancreatic cancer: Its impact on cost of treatment. Cancer Control 2000; 7: 413-20.
24. Rösch T et al. Modern imaging methods versus clinical assessment in the evaluation of hospital in-patients with suspected pancreatic disease. Am J Gastroentreol 2000; 95: 2261-70.
25. Silverstein FE et al. Experimental evaluation of an endoscopic ultrasound probe: In vitro and in vivo canine studies. Gastroenterology 1989; 96: 1058-62.
26. Furukawa T et al. Differential diagnosis between benign and malignant localized stenosis of the main pancreatic duct by intraductal ultrasound of the pancreas. Am J Gastroenterol 1994; 89: 2038-41.
27. Menzel J, Domschke W. Intraductal ultrasonography may localize islet cell tumours negative on endoscopic ultrasound. Scand J Gastroenterol 1998; 33: 109-12.
28. Menzel J et al. Ex vivo examination of the pancreas by intraductal ultrasonography (IDUS). Endoscopy 1993; 25: 571-6.
29. Inui K et al. Endoluminal ultrasonography for pancreatic diseases. Gastroenterol Clin N 1999; 28: 771-81.
30. Nakamura Y et al. Evaluation of intraductal ultrasonography of the pancreas for intraductal papillary tumor. Gastroenterol Endosc 1997; 39: 42.
31. Furukawa T et al. Intraductal ultrasonography of the pancreas: development and clinical potential. Endoscopy 1997; 29: 561-9.
32. Shah SA et al. Pancreatic duct stricture length at ERCP predicts tumor size and pathological stage of pancreatic cancer. Am J Gastroentreol 1997; 92: 964-7.
33. Ralls PW et al. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP) and pancreatic disease. Radiol 1980; 134: 347-52.
34. Raedsch R, Sauerbruch T. Einsatz der ERCP bei Verdacht auf Gallengangs-und Pankreaskarzinom. Z Gastroenterol 1992; 30: 765-9.
35. Lee Y-T. Tissue diagnosis for carcinoma of the pancreas and periampullary structures. Cancer 1982; 49: 1035-9.
36. Alvarez C et al. Cost-benefit analysis of the work-up for pancreatic cancer. Am J Surg 1993; 165: 53-8.
37. Miura Y et al. Adjuvant therapies using biliary stenting for malignant biliary obstruction. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 2001; 8: 113-7.
38. Costamagna G et al. Endoscopic pancreatic stenting in pancreatic cancer. Can J Gastroenterol 1999; 13: 481-7.
39. Geer RJ, Brennan MF. Prognostic indicators for survival after resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Am J Surg 1993; 165: 120-5.
40. Howard TJ et al. Value of helical computed tomography, angiography, and endoscopic ultrasound in determining resectability of periampullary carcinoma. Am J Surg 1997; 174: 237-41.
41. Warshaw AL et al. Preoperative staging and assessment of resectability of pancreatic cancer. Arch Surg 1990; 125: 130-3.
42. Warshaw AL et al. Laparoscopy in the staging and planning of therapy for pancreatic cancer. Am J Surg 1986; 151: 76-80.
43. Taoka H et al. How accurate is helical computed tomography for clinical staging of pancreatic cancer? Am J Surg 1999; 177: 428-32.
44. Hanyu F, Imaizumi T. Extended radical surgery for carcinoma of the head of the pancreas - Japanese experience. In: Beger HG, Büchler MW, Schoenberg MH (eds). Cancer of Pancreas. Ulm: Universitätsverlag Ulm GmbH 1996; 389-95.
45. Fuhrman GM et al. Thin section contrast enhanced computed tomography accurately predicts the resectability of malignant pancreatic neoplasm. Am J Surg 1994; 157: 104-11.
46. Coley SC et al. Spiral CT and the preoperative assessment of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Clin Radiol 1997; 52: 24-30.
47. Bluemke DA, Fishman EK. CT and MR evaluation of pancreatic cancer. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 1998; 32: 71-9.
48. Baum U et al. Mehrzeilen-Spiral-CT in der Diagnostik von Pankreastumoren. Radiologe 1999; 11: 958-64.
49. Varshney S et al. CT arterial portography in the staging of pancreatic malignancy. Int J Pancreatol 2000; 28: 61-7.
50. Paptopoulos V et al. The use of helical CT and CT Angiography to predict vascular involvement from pancreatic cancer correlation with findings at surgery. AJR 1997; 168: 971-7.
51. Vendentham S et al. Small peripancreatic veins: improved assessment in pancreatic cancer patients using thin section pancreatic phase helical CT. AJR 1998; 170: 377-83.
52. Semelka RC et al. Pancreatic disease: prospective comparison of CT, ERCP and 1.5 Tesla MR imaging with dynamic gadolinium enhancement and fat suppression. Radiol 1991; 181: 785-91.
53. Stark DD et al. Hepatic metastases: randomized, controlled comparison of detection with MR imaging and CT. Radiol 1987; 165: 399-406.
54. Semelka RC et al. Liver lesion detection and characterization comparison of single phase spiral CT and current MR techniques. J Magn Reson Imag 1997; 7: 1040-7.
55. Chou CK et al. MRI demonstration of peritoneal implants. Abdom Imaging 1994; 19: 95-101.
56. Rieber A et al. MRI with mangafodipir trisodium in the detection of pancreatic tumours: comparison with helical CT. Brit J Radiol 2000; 73: 1165-9.
57. Romijn MG et al. MRI with mangafodipir trisodium in the detection and staging of pancreatic cancer. J Magn Reson Imaging 2000; 12: 261-8.
58. Yamaguchi K et al. Comparison of endoscopic retrograde and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in the surgical diagnosis of pancreatic diseases. Am J Surg 1998; 175: 203-8.
59. Schulte B et al. Einzelschuß MR-Cholangiopankreatographie (MRCP) mittels einer "Fast-Acquisition-Spin-Echo"-Sequenz (FASE). Akt Radiol 1998; 8: 18-24.
60. Hochwald SN et al. Magnetic resonance imaging with magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography accurately predicts resectability of pancreatic carcinoma. J Gastrointest Surg 1999; 3: 506-11.
61. Vahldiek G et al. MR-Cholangiopancreaticography (MRCP) and MR-Angiography: Morphologic changes with magnetic resonance imaging. Anticancer Res 1999; 19: 2451-8.
62. McFarland EG et al. Preoperative staging of cancer of the pancreas: value of MR-angiography versus conventional angiography in detecting portal venous invasion. AJR 1996; 166: 37-43.
63. Catalano C et al. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma: combination of MR imaging, MR angiography and MR cholangiopancreaticography for the diagnosis and assessment of respectability. Eur Radiol 1998; 8: 428-34.
64. Gaa J et al. Combined use of MRI and MR cholangiopancreaticography and contrast-enhanced dual phase 3-D MR angiography in diagnosis of pancreatic tumors: initial clinical results. Rofo Fortschr Gab Röntgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 1999; 170: 528-33.
65. Warburg O. The metabolism of tumors. London, UK: Constable & Co 1930.
66. 18Fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography in the management of patients with suspected pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg 1998; 229: 729-38.
67. Delbeke D et al. Optimal interpretation of FDG PET in the diagnosis, staging and management of pancreatic carcinoma. J Nucl Med 1999; 40: 1784-91.
68. Stollfuss JC et al. 2-(Florine-18)-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose PET in the detection of pancreatic cancer: Value of quantitative image interpretation. Radiology 1995; 195: 339-44.
69. Zimmy M et al. Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma: A report of 106 cases. Eur J Nucl Med 1997; 24: 678-82.
70. Bares R et al. F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose PET in vivo evaluation of pancreatic glucose metabolism for detection of pancreatic cancer. Radiology 1994; 192: 79-86.
71. Inokuma T et al. Evaluation of pancreatic tumors with positron emission tomography and F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose: Comparison with CT and US. Radiology 1995; 195: 345-52.
72. Berberat P et al. Diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancer by positron emission tomography. World J Surg 1999; 23: 882-7.
73. Fröhlich A et al. Detection of liver metastases from pancreatic cancer using FDG-PET. J Nucl Med 1999; 40: 250-5.
74. Nakata B et al. 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography and the prognosis of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Cancer 1996; 79: 695-9.
75. 18F- fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for patients with pancreatic cancer. Int J Oncol 2001; 19: 53-8.