Aim: Rectal cancer staging represents a crucial step to select the best treatment for this tumour. Particularly after neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), it may influence the surgical procedure (e.g. radical resection vs. local excision). The aim of this study was to determine the best lymph node size cut-off at computed tomography (CT) to predict nodal metastasis in rectal cancer patients with and without preoperative CRT. Methods: A consecutive series of patients operated on for primary midelow rectal adenocarcinoma, all staged with pelvic CT scan, were subdivided as follows: those who underwent surgery alone treatment without CRT (Group A) and those who underwent preoperative CRT (Group B). All CT scans were re-viewed by a single radiologist and, based on the lymph node size, findings were compared with pathologic lymph node status (pN). At each lymph node size cut-off value, the following were calculated: accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV). The best cut-off value was defined as having an accuracy 70% with the highest NPV. Results: The study population consisted of 162 patients: Group A (n ¼ 52) and Group B (n ¼ 110). Patients classified as pN-positive (n ¼ 45) had a higher number of and larger sized lymph nodes by CT scan than patients classified as pN-negative (n ¼ 117). The cutoff values with an accuracy 70% ranged between 7 and 11 mm in Group A and between 9 and 14 mm in Group B. The cut-off with the best NPV was 7 mm for Group A and 10 mm for Group B. Conclusions: Acknowledging the limitations of the dimensional criterion, lymph node size cut-off values found in our study may be useful for planning rectal cancer treatment using CT scan.

Prediction of rectal lymph node metastasis by pelvic computed tomography measurement

POMERRI, FABIO;PUCCIARELLI, SALVATORE;RUGGE, MASSIMO;URSO E;MUZZIO, PIER CARLO;NITTI, DONATO
2009

Abstract

Aim: Rectal cancer staging represents a crucial step to select the best treatment for this tumour. Particularly after neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT), it may influence the surgical procedure (e.g. radical resection vs. local excision). The aim of this study was to determine the best lymph node size cut-off at computed tomography (CT) to predict nodal metastasis in rectal cancer patients with and without preoperative CRT. Methods: A consecutive series of patients operated on for primary midelow rectal adenocarcinoma, all staged with pelvic CT scan, were subdivided as follows: those who underwent surgery alone treatment without CRT (Group A) and those who underwent preoperative CRT (Group B). All CT scans were re-viewed by a single radiologist and, based on the lymph node size, findings were compared with pathologic lymph node status (pN). At each lymph node size cut-off value, the following were calculated: accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV). The best cut-off value was defined as having an accuracy 70% with the highest NPV. Results: The study population consisted of 162 patients: Group A (n ¼ 52) and Group B (n ¼ 110). Patients classified as pN-positive (n ¼ 45) had a higher number of and larger sized lymph nodes by CT scan than patients classified as pN-negative (n ¼ 117). The cutoff values with an accuracy 70% ranged between 7 and 11 mm in Group A and between 9 and 14 mm in Group B. The cut-off with the best NPV was 7 mm for Group A and 10 mm for Group B. Conclusions: Acknowledging the limitations of the dimensional criterion, lymph node size cut-off values found in our study may be useful for planning rectal cancer treatment using CT scan.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11577/2430051
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 3
  • Scopus 25
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 21
social impact