Endosonography Elastography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Restaging and Response Assessment of Rectal Cancer After Neoadjuvant Therapy.

IF 0.7 4区 医学 Q4 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING Ultrasound Quarterly Pub Date : 2024-06-01 DOI:10.1097/RUQ.0000000000000676
Xuemei Tang, Hongmei Yuan, Xurong Mu, Peng Gu, Pengfei Kong
{"title":"Endosonography Elastography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Restaging and Response Assessment of Rectal Cancer After Neoadjuvant Therapy.","authors":"Xuemei Tang, Hongmei Yuan, Xurong Mu, Peng Gu, Pengfei Kong","doi":"10.1097/RUQ.0000000000000676","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>The objective of this academic research is to assess the efficacy of conventional endorectal ultrasound (ERUS), ultrasonic shear wave elastography (SWE), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques in evaluating the impact of neoadjuvant therapy (nCRT). Forty-five patients with advanced low rectal cancer (T ≥ 3) were included. Before and after nCRT, ERUS, SWE, and MRI evaluations were conducted. The T staging of ultrasound (uT) and MRI (mT) were evaluated and compared with the pathological T staging (ypT). The accuracy of the 2 diagnostic methods for T staging, and T downstaging was evaluated. The ultrasound elasticity difference and relative elasticity before and after treatment and pathological T downstaging were compared, and its cutoff value and the area under the curve were assessed. In terms of T staging accuracy after chemoradiotherapy, the values for ERUS, ERUS combined with SWE, and MRI were 64.4%, 71.1%, and 62.2%, respectively. No significant difference was observed among these groups ( P > 0.05). The accuracy of uT downstaging was 84.4%, and that of mT downstaging was 88.9%. The receiver operating characteristic curve of uLD and elastic differences and relative elasticity of T downstaging after treatment were 0.754, 0.817, and 0.886, respectively (all P < 0.05). Both ERUS and MRI can evaluate ypT downstaging. The indicators for evaluating T downstaging are uLD, elasticity difference, and relative elasticity, providing more reference for clinical assessment of nCRT efficacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":49116,"journal":{"name":"Ultrasound Quarterly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ultrasound Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/RUQ.0000000000000676","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: The objective of this academic research is to assess the efficacy of conventional endorectal ultrasound (ERUS), ultrasonic shear wave elastography (SWE), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques in evaluating the impact of neoadjuvant therapy (nCRT). Forty-five patients with advanced low rectal cancer (T ≥ 3) were included. Before and after nCRT, ERUS, SWE, and MRI evaluations were conducted. The T staging of ultrasound (uT) and MRI (mT) were evaluated and compared with the pathological T staging (ypT). The accuracy of the 2 diagnostic methods for T staging, and T downstaging was evaluated. The ultrasound elasticity difference and relative elasticity before and after treatment and pathological T downstaging were compared, and its cutoff value and the area under the curve were assessed. In terms of T staging accuracy after chemoradiotherapy, the values for ERUS, ERUS combined with SWE, and MRI were 64.4%, 71.1%, and 62.2%, respectively. No significant difference was observed among these groups ( P > 0.05). The accuracy of uT downstaging was 84.4%, and that of mT downstaging was 88.9%. The receiver operating characteristic curve of uLD and elastic differences and relative elasticity of T downstaging after treatment were 0.754, 0.817, and 0.886, respectively (all P < 0.05). Both ERUS and MRI can evaluate ypT downstaging. The indicators for evaluating T downstaging are uLD, elasticity difference, and relative elasticity, providing more reference for clinical assessment of nCRT efficacy.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
内超声弹性成像和磁共振成像在直肠癌新辅助治疗后的重新分期和反应评估中的应用
摘要:本学术研究旨在评估传统肛门直肠内超声(ERUS)、超声剪切波弹性成像(SWE)和磁共振成像(MRI)技术在评估新辅助治疗(nCRT)影响方面的功效。研究纳入了 45 例晚期低位直肠癌(T ≥ 3)患者。在新辅助治疗前后,对患者进行了ERUS、SWE和MRI评估。对超声(uT)和磁共振成像(mT)的T分期进行了评估,并与病理T分期(ypT)进行了比较。评估了这两种诊断方法在 T 分期和 T 降期方面的准确性。比较了治疗前后的超声弹性差异和相对弹性,并评估了其临界值和曲线下面积。在化疗放疗后的T分期准确性方面,ERUS、ERUS联合SWE和MRI的数值分别为64.4%、71.1%和62.2%。各组间无明显差异(P>0.05)。uT下分期的准确率为84.4%,mT下分期的准确率为88.9%。治疗后uLD和T下分期的弹性差异和相对弹性的接收者操作特征曲线分别为0.754、0.817和0.886(P均<0.05)。ERUS和MRI均可评估ypT降期。uLD、弹性差和相对弹性是评价T分期的指标,为临床评估nCRT疗效提供了更多参考。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Ultrasound Quarterly
Ultrasound Quarterly RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
105
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Ultrasound Quarterly provides coverage of the newest, most sophisticated ultrasound techniques as well as in-depth analysis of important developments in this dynamic field. The journal publishes reviews of a wide variety of topics including trans-vaginal ultrasonography, detection of fetal anomalies, color Doppler flow imaging, pediatric ultrasonography, and breast sonography. Official Journal of the Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound
期刊最新文献
CEUS Is Possible Where MRI Is Impossible! Review of Clinical Applications of Sonazoid Ultrasound Contrast for Liver Evaluation. Cerebral, Splanchnic, and Renal Transit Time Measurement and Blood Volume Estimation Using Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography. Residual Ultrasound-Enhancing Agents Mimicking Portal Venous Gas. Objective Analysis of Predictive Value of Ultrasound Quantitative Scoring System for Treatment Method Selection in Cesarean Scar Pregnancy.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1