DOCSLIB.ORG

Role of Endoscopy in the Staging and Management of Colorectal Cancer

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Role of Endoscopy in the Staging and Management of Colorectal Cancer GUIDELINE Role of endoscopy in the staging and management of colorectal cancer This is one of a series of statements discussing the use PRESURGICAL LOCALIZATION of GI endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society Colonoscopy has an important role in the localization for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) prepared this text. of malignant lesions for subsequent identification at the In preparing this guideline, a search of the medical liter- time of surgery. Preoperative endoscopic marking can be ature was performed by using PubMed. Additional refer- helpful in localizing flat, small, or subtle colonic lesions ences were obtained from the bibliographies of the that may be difficult to identify by inspection or palpation identified articles and from recommendations of expert during surgery. Marking techniques currently available consultants. When limited or no data exist from well- include endoscopic tattooing and metallic clip place- designed prospective trials, emphasis is given to results ment.5-7 Tattoos with India ink are visible at surgery for from large series and reports from recognized experts. up to 5 months.5 No guidelines exist on the optimal Guidelines for appropriate use of endoscopy are based placement of tattoos or metallic clips; therefore, close on a critical review of the available data and expert con- communication with surgical colleagues involved in the sensus at the time that the guidelines are drafted. Further subsequent resection is important. controlled clinical studies may be needed to clarify as- pects of this guideline. This guideline may be revised as necessary to account for changes in technology, new STAGING OF CRC data, or other aspects of clinical practice. The recommen- dations were based on reviewed studies and were graded CRC is staged according to the TNM system established 1 on the strength of the supporting evidence (Table 1). This by the American Joint Committee on Cancer (Table 2).8 guideline is intended to be an educational device The primary clinical impact of staging CRC is to to provide information that may assist endoscopists differentiate T1N0 or T2N0 disease from T3 or TxN1-2 in providing care to patients. This guideline is not disease, for which chemoradiation is recommended in addi- a rule and should not be construed as establishing a tion to surgical resection.9 Several meta-analyses have legal standard of care or as encouraging, advocating, evaluated the staging accuracy of EUS,10-13 and some have requiring, or discouraging any particular treatment. compared the accuracy of EUS with that of magnetic reso- Clinical decisions in any particular case involve a nance imaging (MRI) and CT.10,11 In general, EUS was found ’ complex analysis of the patient s condition and available to exhibit high sensitivity (80%-96%) and specificity (75%- courses of action. Therefore, clinical considerations may 98%) for the staging of T0 to T3 disease.10-13 EUS may have lead an endoscopist to take a course of action that varies higher T-staging accuracy than other cross-sectional imaging from these guidelines. tests,10 but nodal staging accuracy was modest for EUS (67% sensitivity, 78% specificity) and not statistically 10,11 Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most commonly different among the 3 imaging modalities. MRI may diagnosed cancer in American men and women and the also have a role in guiding surgery because it shows the an- second leading cause of cancer death.2 This updated atomic relationship between rectal tumors and the pelvic ASGE guideline focuses on the role of endoscopy in the floor and sacrum. Correctly differentiating benign from staging and treatment of CRC. Recommendations for malignant perirectal lymphadenopathy by EUS is difficult CRC screening and surveillance are discussed in previous because inflammatory nodes may be present in the setting documents by the Multi-Society Task Force endorsed by of rectal cancer; however, EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) of the ASGE.3,4 perirectal lymph nodes may be helpful when the presence of nodal metastasis would change patient management.14 The accuracy of EUS may be subject to publication bias and should be viewed with some caution.15 In clinical practice, other imaging modalities may have comparable Copyright ª 2013 by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy staging accuracy. A 2011 prospective study of 90 subjects 0016-5107/$36.00 found a T2 staging accuracy of 76% to 77% for both EUS http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2013.04.163 and MRI and T3 staging accuracy of 76% for EUS and 83% 8 GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY Volume 78, No. 1 : 2013 www.giejournal.org Role of endoscopy in the staging and management of colorectal cancer TABLE 1. GRADE system for rating the quality of TABLE 2. TNM staging classification of colorectal evidence for guidelines1 cancer Quality of Primary tumor (T) evidence Definition Symbol TX Primary tumor cannot be assessed High quality Further research is very 4444 unlikely to change our T0 No evidence of primary tumor confidence in the Tis Carcinoma in situ: intraepithelial or invasion estimate of effect of lamina propria 444B Moderate quality Further research is likely T1 Tumor invades submucosa to have an important impact T2 Tumor invades muscularis propria on our confidence in the estimate of effect and T3 Tumor invades through the muscularis propria may change the estimate into the subserosa or into nonperitonealized pericolic or perirectal tissues Low quality Further research is 44BB very likely to have an T4 Tumor directly invades other organs or structures important impact on and/or perforates visceral peritoneum our confidence in the Regional lymph nodes (N) estimate of effect and is likely to change the NX Regional lymph nodes cannot be assessed estimate N0 No regional lymph node metastasis Very low quality Any estimate of effect is 4BBB N1 Metastasis in 1-3 regional lymph nodes very uncertain N2 Metastasis in R4 regional lymph nodes Distant metastasis (M) MX Distant metastasis cannot be assessed for MRI (P O .05). MRI did not visualize any T1 tumors, and EUS understaged all T4 tumors in that series.16 The finding M0 No distant metastasis of a nontraversable malignant stricture in the rectum may M1 Distant metastasis be predictive of advanced tumor stage (T3, T4, or Tx, N1 or 2) and should be locally staged by radiographic cross- sectional imaging.17,18 The reported accuracy of EUS restag- ing after neoadjuvant chemoradiation has been modest to surgery after colonic SEMS placement for decompression is poor: 38% to 75% for T staging and 57% to 84% for N stag- 60% to 85%.27 The major adverse events associated with ing.19-25 A prospective study of 90 subjects comparing CT, colonic SEMS placement include obstruction, migration, MRI, and EUS for T and N staging after neoadjuvant therapy and perforation.28 In addition, dilation after colonic SEMS found similarly low accuracy for all 3 modalities. T staging placement should be avoided because of the associated accuracy was 37% by CT, 34% by MRI, and 27% by EUS. N risk of perforation.28 staging was 62% by CT, 68% by MRI, and 65% by EUS. ENDOSCOPIC RESECTION OF COLORECTAL ENDOSCOPIC MANAGEMENT OF MALIGNANT NEOPLASIA COLONIC OBSTRUCTION In general, flat and polypoid lesions found at the time Endoscopic management of malignant obstruction is of colonoscopy should be removed.29 Pedunculated discussed in a recent ASGE Standards of Practice docu- lesions are usually removed by using standard snare ment.26 Endoscopic alternatives to surgical decompression polypectomy. Pedunculated polyps with cancer confined include placement of a self-expandable metal stent (SEMS), to the submucosa and without evidence of unfavorable tumor debulking, and placement of a decompression histological factors have a 0.3% risk of cancer recurrence tube. Even with successful endoscopic decompression, early or lymph node metastasis after complete endoscopic surgical consultation is recommended because patients removal, and surgery is not necessary.30 may deteriorate rapidly. Endoscopy should not be per- For pedunculated polyps with unfavorable histological formed in patients with peritoneal signs or suspicion of per- features (!1 mm cancer-free margin, poor histological dif- foration. Colonic SEMS may also be used as a “bridge to ferentiation, vascular or lymphatic invasion), invading the surgery” for patients with malignant obstruction who are submucosa of the bowel wall below the polyp’s stalk, or ex- surgical candidates. The success rate of single-stage elective tending through the submucosa into the deeper wall www.giejournal.org Volume 78, No. 1 : 2013 GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY 9 Role of endoscopy in the staging and management of colorectal cancer layers, surgery is recommended because endoscopic re- polyp tissue include taking a small margin of surrounding moval is unlikely to be curative.31-33 The site of resection mucosa at the polyp edges41 or tissue ablation. Tissue of such polyps should be inked with a tattoo to facilitate ablation has been described both prophylactically at the identification during surgery. In all cases of potential surgi- resection margins after a piecemeal removal and for the cal referral, the risk of recurrent disease should be weighed treatment of endoscopically visible residual polypoid against the operative risk in individual patients. tissue. Ablation techniques have been primarily described Endoscopic removal of larger sessile or flat lesions may with argon plasma coagulation (APC),42-44 with 1 report require more advanced techniques. EMR and endoscopic of diathermy ablation with the snare tip.41 Estimates of submucosal dissection (ESD) are reviewed in a 2008 short-term (2-6 months) residual/recurrence rates after ASGE Technology Status Evaluation Report.34 EMR is piecemeal EMR are broad, ranging from 0% to 55%.45 Late indicated for sessile or flat neoplastic lesions confined to recurrence (after 12 months) is less common, occurring in the mucosa or submucosa of the colon.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Endoscopic Ultrasound for the Diagnosis of Disease and Staging of Cancers in Adult Patients with Gastroenterological Or Oncological Disease: Guidelines
    TITLE: Endoscopic Ultrasound for the Diagnosis of Disease and Staging of Cancers in Adult Patients with Gastroenterological or Oncological Disease: Guidelines DATE: 26 February 2014 RESEARCH QUESTION What are the evidence-based guidelines for the use of endoscopic ultrasound in the diagnosis of disease and staging of cancers in adult patient with gastroenterological or oncological disease? KEY MESSAGE Thirteen evidence-based guidelines regarding the use of endoscopic ultrasound in the diagnosis of disease and staging of cancers in adult patient with gastroenterological or oncological disease were identified. METHODS A limited literature search was conducted on key resources including PubMed, The Cochrane Library (2014, Issue 2), University of York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) databases, Canadian and major international health technology agencies, as well as a focused Internet search. Methodological filters were applied to limit retrieval to guidelines. The search was also limited to English language documents published between January 1, 2009 and February 11, 2014. Internet links were provided, where available. The summary of findings was prepared from the abstracts of the relevant information. Please note that data contained in abstracts may not always be an accurate reflection of the data contained within the full article. RESULTS Thirteen evidence-based guidelines regarding the staging and diagnosis of cancer and of gastrointestinal diseases were identified. Additional references of potential interest are provided in the appendix. Disclaimer: The Rapid Response Service is an information service for those involved in planning and providing health care in Canada. Rapid responses are based on a limited literature search and are not comprehensive, systematic reviews.
    [Show full text]
  • The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Inherited Polyposis Syndromes Daniel Herzig, M.D
    CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Inherited Polyposis Syndromes Daniel Herzig, M.D. • Karin Hardimann, M.D. • Martin Weiser, M.D. • Nancy Yu, M.D. Ian Paquette, M.D. • Daniel L. Feingold, M.D. • Scott R. Steele, M.D. Prepared by the Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons he American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons METHODOLOGY (ASCRS) is dedicated to ensuring high-quality pa- tient care by advancing the science, prevention, and These guidelines are built on the last set of the ASCRS T Practice Parameters for the Identification and Testing of management of disorders and diseases of the colon, rectum, Patients at Risk for Dominantly Inherited Colorectal Can- and anus. The Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee is 1 composed of society members who are chosen because they cer published in 2003. An organized search of MEDLINE have demonstrated expertise in the specialty of colon and (1946 to December week 1, 2016) was performed from rectal surgery. This committee was created to lead interna- 1946 through week 4 of September 2016 (Fig. 1). Subject tional efforts in defining quality care for conditions related headings for “adenomatous polyposis coli” (4203 results) to the colon, rectum, and anus, in addition to the devel- and “intestinal polyposis” (445 results) were included, us- opment of Clinical Practice Guidelines based on the best ing focused search. The results were combined (4629 re- available evidence. These guidelines are inclusive and not sults) and limited to English language (3981 results), then prescriptive.
    [Show full text]
  • Three-Way Comparative Study of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided
    Surgical Endoscopy (2019) 33:1260–1270 and Other Interventional Techniques https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-018-6406-7 Three-way comparative study of endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural gallbladder drainage using lumen-apposing metal stents versus endoscopic transpapillary drainage versus percutaneous cholecystostomy for gallbladder drainage in high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis: clinical outcomes and success in an International, Multicenter Study Ali Siddiqui1 · Rastislav Kunda3 · Amy Tyberg2 · Mustafa A. Arain4 · Arish Noor1 · Tayebah Mumtaz1 · Usama Iqbal1 · David E. Loren1 · Thomas E. Kowalski1 · Douglas G. Adler5 · Monica Saumoy2 · Monica Gaidhane2 · Shawn Mallery4 · Eric M. Christiansen4 · Jose Nieto6 · Michel Kahaleh2 Received: 9 November 2017 / Accepted: 24 August 2018 / Published online: 12 September 2018 © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018 Abstract Background Percutaneous cholecystostomy tube (PTGBD), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with trans- papillary gallbladder drainage (TP), and endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural gallbladder drainage (EGBD) using lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) have been offered for gallbladder decompression for acute cholecystitis in high-risk surgical patients. Yet, there are limited data comparing these therapies. Our aim was to compare the safety and efficacy of EGBD to TP and PTGBD for gallbladder drainage. Methods We retrospectively collected high-risk surgical patients from six centers with acute cholecystitis who underwent gallbladder drainage by EGBD, TP, or PTGBD. Data included technical success (gallbladder drainage), clinical success (acute cholecystitis resolution), adverse events (AE), and follow-up. Results From 2010 to 2016, 372 patients underwent gallbladder drainage, with 146 by PTGBD, 124 by TP, and 102 drained by EGBD. Technical (98% vs. 88% vs. 94%; p = 0.004) and Clinical (97% vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Hepatoblastoma and APC Gene Mutation in Familial Adenomatous Polyposis Gut: First Published As 10.1136/Gut.39.6.867 on 1 December 1996
    Gut 1996; 39: 867-869 867 Hepatoblastoma and APC gene mutation in familial adenomatous polyposis Gut: first published as 10.1136/gut.39.6.867 on 1 December 1996. Downloaded from F M Giardiello, G M Petersen, J D Brensinger, M C Luce, M C Cayouette, J Bacon, S V Booker, S R Hamilton Abstract tumours; and extracolonic cancers of the Background-Hepatoblastoma is a rare, thyroid, duodenum, pancreas, liver, and rapidly progressive, usually fatal child- brain.1-4 hood malignancy, which if confined to the Hepatoblastoma is a rare malignant liver can be cured by radical surgical embryonal tumour of the liver, which occurs in resection. An association between hepato- infancy and childhood. An association between blastoma and familial adenomatous hepatoblastoma and familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP), which is due to germline polyposis was first described by Kingston et al mutation of the APC (adenomatous in 1982,6 and since then over 30 additional polyposis coli) gene, has been confirmed, cases have been reported.7-15 Moreover, a but correlation with site of APC mutation pronounced increased relative risk of hepato- has not been studied. blastoma in patients affected with FAP and Aim-To analyse the APC mutational their first degree relatives has been found spectrum in FAP families with hepato- (relative risk 847, 95% confidence limits 230 blastoma as a possible basis to select and 2168).16 kindreds for surveillance. FAP is caused by germline mutations of the Patients-Eight patients with hepato- APC (adenomatous polyposis coli) gene blastoma in seven FAP kindreds were located on the long arm of chromosome 5 in compared with 97 families with identified band q2 1.17-'20The APC gene has 15 exons and APC gene mutation in a large Registry.
    [Show full text]
  • Familial Adenomatous Polyposis Polymnia Galiatsatos, M.D., F.R.C.P.(C),1 and William D
    American Journal of Gastroenterology ISSN 0002-9270 C 2006 by Am. Coll. of Gastroenterology doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00375.x Published by Blackwell Publishing CME Familial Adenomatous Polyposis Polymnia Galiatsatos, M.D., F.R.C.P.(C),1 and William D. Foulkes, M.B., Ph.D.2 1Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, The Sir Mortimer B. Davis Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, and 2Program in Cancer Genetics, Departments of Oncology and Human Genetics, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada Familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) is an autosomal-dominant colorectal cancer syndrome, caused by a germline mutation in the adenomatous polyposis coli (APC) gene, on chromosome 5q21. It is characterized by hundreds of adenomatous colorectal polyps, with an almost inevitable progression to colorectal cancer at an average age of 35 to 40 yr. Associated features include upper gastrointestinal tract polyps, congenital hypertrophy of the retinal pigment epithelium, desmoid tumors, and other extracolonic malignancies. Gardner syndrome is more of a historical subdivision of FAP, characterized by osteomas, dental anomalies, epidermal cysts, and soft tissue tumors. Other specified variants include Turcot syndrome (associated with central nervous system malignancies) and hereditary desmoid disease. Several genotype–phenotype correlations have been observed. Attenuated FAP is a phenotypically distinct entity, presenting with fewer than 100 adenomas. Multiple colorectal adenomas can also be caused by mutations in the human MutY homologue (MYH) gene, in an autosomal recessive condition referred to as MYH associated polyposis (MAP). Endoscopic screening of FAP probands and relatives is advocated as early as the ages of 10–12 yr, with the objective of reducing the occurrence of colorectal cancer.
    [Show full text]
  • Cancer Treatment and Survivorship Facts & Figures 2019-2021
    Cancer Treatment & Survivorship Facts & Figures 2019-2021 Estimated Numbers of Cancer Survivors by State as of January 1, 2019 WA 386,540 NH MT VT 84,080 ME ND 95,540 59,970 38,430 34,360 OR MN 213,620 300,980 MA ID 434,230 77,860 SD WI NY 42,810 313,370 1,105,550 WY MI 33,310 RI 570,760 67,900 IA PA NE CT 243,410 NV 185,720 771,120 108,500 OH 132,950 NJ 543,190 UT IL IN 581,350 115,840 651,810 296,940 DE 55,460 CA CO WV 225,470 1,888,480 KS 117,070 VA MO MD 275,420 151,950 408,060 300,200 KY 254,780 DC 18,750 NC TN 470,120 AZ OK 326,530 NM 207,260 AR 392,530 111,620 SC 143,320 280,890 GA AL MS 446,900 135,260 244,320 TX 1,140,170 LA 232,100 AK 36,550 FL 1,482,090 US 16,920,370 HI 84,960 States estimates do not sum to US total due to rounding. Source: Surveillance Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute. Contents Introduction 1 Long-term Survivorship 24 Who Are Cancer Survivors? 1 Quality of Life 24 How Many People Have a History of Cancer? 2 Financial Hardship among Cancer Survivors 26 Cancer Treatment and Common Side Effects 4 Regaining and Improving Health through Healthy Behaviors 26 Cancer Survival and Access to Care 5 Concerns of Caregivers and Families 28 Selected Cancers 6 The Future of Cancer Survivorship in Breast (Female) 6 the United States 28 Cancers in Children and Adolescents 9 The American Cancer Society 30 Colon and Rectum 10 How the American Cancer Society Saves Lives 30 Leukemia and Lymphoma 12 Research 34 Lung and Bronchus 15 Advocacy 34 Melanoma of the Skin 16 Prostate 16 Sources of Statistics 36 Testis 17 References 37 Thyroid 19 Acknowledgments 45 Urinary Bladder 19 Uterine Corpus 21 Navigating the Cancer Experience: Treatment and Supportive Care 22 Making Decisions about Cancer Care 22 Cancer Rehabilitation 22 Psychosocial Care 23 Palliative Care 23 Transitioning to Long-term Survivorship 23 This publication attempts to summarize current scientific information about Global Headquarters: American Cancer Society Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Sporadic (Nonhereditary) Colorectal Cancer: Introduction
    Sporadic (Nonhereditary) Colorectal Cancer: Introduction Colorectal cancer affects about 5% of the population, with up to 150,000 new cases per year in the United States alone. Cancer of the large intestine accounts for 21% of all cancers in the US, ranking second only to lung cancer in mortality in both males and females. It is, however, one of the most potentially curable of gastrointestinal cancers. Colorectal cancer is detected through screening procedures or when the patient presents with symptoms. Screening is vital to prevention and should be a part of routine care for adults over the age of 50 who are at average risk. High-risk individuals (those with previous colon cancer , family history of colon cancer , inflammatory bowel disease, or history of colorectal polyps) require careful follow-up. There is great variability in the worldwide incidence and mortality rates. Industrialized nations appear to have the greatest risk while most developing nations have lower rates. Unfortunately, this incidence is on the increase. North America, Western Europe, Australia and New Zealand have high rates for colorectal neoplasms (Figure 2). Figure 1. Location of the colon in the body. Figure 2. Geographic distribution of sporadic colon cancer . Symptoms Colorectal cancer does not usually produce symptoms early in the disease process. Symptoms are dependent upon the site of the primary tumor. Cancers of the proximal colon tend to grow larger than those of the left colon and rectum before they produce symptoms. Abnormal vasculature and trauma from the fecal stream may result in bleeding as the tumor expands in the intestinal lumen.
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Preoperative Endoscopic Ultrasound in Surgical Oncology
    REVIEW Impact of preoperative endoscopic ultrasound in surgical oncology Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has a strong impact on the imaging and staging of solid tumors within or in close proximity of the upper GI tract. Technological developments during the last two decades have increased the image quality and allowed very detailed visualization of local tumor spread and lymph node affection. Current indications for EUS of the upper GI tract encompass the differentiation between benign and malignant lesions, the staging of esophageal, gastric and pancreatic cancer, and the procurement of a biopsy specimen through fine-needle aspiration. Various technical innovations during the past two decades have increased the diagnostic quality and have simultaneously strengthened the role of EUS in the clinical setting. This article will give a compressed summary on the current state of EUS and possible further technical developments. 1 KEYWORDS: 3D imaging elastosonography endoscopic ultrasound miniprobes Sascha S Chopra & oncologic surgery Michael Hünerbein† 1Department of General & Transplantation Surgery, Charité Campus Virchow-Clinic, Berlin, Conventional endoscopic ultrasound the so-called ‘miniprobes’ into the biliary system Germany Linear versus radial systems or the pancreatic duct in order to obtain high-res- †Author for correspondence: Department of Surgery & Surgical Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) with flex- olution radial ultrasound images locally. Present Oncology, Helios Hospital Berlin, ible endoscopes is an important diagnostic and mini probes show a diameter of 2–3 mm and oper- 13122 Berlin, Germany Tel.: +49 309 417 1480 therapeutic tool, especially for the local staging ate with frequencies between 12 and 30 MHz. Fax: +49 309 417 1404 of gastrointestinal (GI) cancers, the differen- The main drawbacks of these devices are the lim- michael.huenerbein@ tiation between benign and malignant tumors, ited durability and the decreased depth of penetra- helios-kliniken.de and interventional procedures, such as biopsies tion (~2 cm).
    [Show full text]
  • Cigna Medical Coverage Policies – Radiology Neck Imaging Effective November 15, 2018
    Cigna Medical Coverage Policies – Radiology Neck Imaging Effective November 15, 2018 ______________________________________________________________________________________ Instructions for use The following coverage policy applies to health benefit plans administered by Cigna. Coverage policies are intended to provide guidance in interpreting certain standard Cigna benefit plans and are used by medical directors and other health care professionals in making medical necessity and other coverage determinations. Please note the terms of a customer’s particular benefit plan document may differ significantly from the standard benefit plans upon which these coverage policies are based. For example, a customer’s benefit plan document may contain a specific exclusion related to a topic addressed in a coverage policy. In the event of a conflict, a customer’s benefit plan document always supersedes the information in the coverage policy. In the absence of federal or state coverage mandates, benefits are ultimately determined by the terms of the applicable benefit plan document. Coverage determinations in each specific instance require consideration of: 1. The terms of the applicable benefit plan document in effect on the date of service 2. Any applicable laws and regulations 3. Any relevant collateral source materials including coverage policies 4. The specific facts of the particular situation Coverage policies relate exclusively to the administration of health benefit plans. Coverage policies are not recommendations for treatment and should never be used as treatment guidelines. This evidence-based medical coverage policy has been developed by eviCore, Inc. Some information in this coverage policy may not apply to all benefit plans administered by Cigna. These guidelines include procedures eviCore does not review for Cigna.
    [Show full text]
  • Endoscopic Ultrasound: What Is It and When Should It Be Used?
    CMJ0906-Willert.qxd 11/10/09 7:54 PM Page 539 ■ CLINICAL PRACTICE Clinical Medicine 2009, Vol 9, No 6: 539–43 Endoscopic ultrasound: what is it and when should it be used? Yogananda Reddy and Robert P Willert ABSTRACT – Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is an increasingly There are two types of commonly used echoendoscopes each available diagnostic and therapeutic tool used within the UK. with differing characteristics. Radial EUS was the first to be It has wide applications both in the gastrointestinal tract and developed and provides a 360-degree view in a plane perpendic- mediastinum with its current main uses being in the staging ular to that of the scope, similar to a computed tomography (CT) of luminal malignancies and assessment of pancreatic and image (Fig 2). Linear EUS provides a localised oblique image subepithelial lesions. The emergence of linear EUS has parallel to the scope and enables therapeutic intervention under opened up new therapeutic avenues with fine needle aspira- ultrasound (Fig 3). High frequency EUS mini-probes are also tion, trucut biopsies, coeliac plexus blocks and transmural available which can be passed down a standard biopsy channel of pseudocyst drainage all now possible. Future developments an endoscope in cases where strictures cannot be passed using a include localised brachytherapy/chemotherapy and alcohol standard EUS scope. ablation of unresectable pancreatic malignancies and EUS- guided endoscopic surgery. Indications for endoscopic ultrasound KEY WORDS: cancer staging, endoscopic ultrasound, fine The indications for EUS can be divided into several categories: needle aspiration • staging of GI malignancies • evaluating pancreaticobiliary disease Introduction • evaluating subepithelial abnormalities • evaluating extraluminal abnormalities Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) was developed in the 1980s • staging of lung cancer but was rarely used within most of the UK.
    [Show full text]
  • VARYING DEGREES of MALIGNANCY in CANCER of the BREAST Differences in the Degree of Malignancy of Malignant Tumors Have Been Reco
    VARYING DEGREES OF MALIGNANCY IN CANCER OF THE BREAST ROBERT 13. GREENOUGH BOSTON Differences in the degree of malignancy of malignant tumors have been recognized by pathologists for many years. Indeed, Virchow’s original conception of a malignant tumor was one composed of cells, derived from the tissue cells of the individual, but differing from the normal cells in the rapidity and independ- ence of their growth. Hansemann (1) carried this idea somewhat further and intro- duced the word “anaplasia” to indicate the process by which cancer cells came to differ from the normal type cell of the body tissue concerned. Anaplasia involves a loss of differentiation and an increase of reproductive power, so that the anaplastic cell fulfils only in abortive fashion, if at all, its normal function, such as secretion or keratinization; while it shows by increased number of mitotic figures, and especially by the irregularity and abnormality of its nuclear chromatic elements and figures, the increase in rapidity of cell division and of cell growth which is characteristic of malignancy. X number of attempts have been made to grade the malig- nancy of different breast tumors by distinguishing their histo- logical characteristics, such as adenocarcinoma, medullary, scirrhus, colloid, etc. ; but with the exception of adenocarcinoma and colloid, these divisions have proved of little value in prognosis. There the matter rested till 1921, when, under the influence of MacCarty (2) of the Mayo Clinic, Broders published a paper suggesting the classification of cancer tissue according to the degree of malignancy, as estimated by loss of differentiation and increase of reproductive characteristics.
    [Show full text]
  • Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Placement of the Lumen-Apposing Self-Expandable Metallic Stent for Gallbladder Drainage: a Promising Technique
    REVIEW ARTICLE Annals of Gastroenterology (2016) 29, 162-167 Endoscopic ultrasound-guided placement of the lumen-apposing self-expandable metallic stent for gallbladder drainage: a promising technique Rashmee Patila, Mel A. Onab, Charilaos Papafragkakisc, Sury Anandb, Sushil Duddempudib Mount Sinai Health Systems New York, USA; The Brooklyn Hospital Center Academic Affiliate of The Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Clinical Affiliate of The Mount Sinai Hospital, Brooklyn, New York; MD Anderson Cancer Center Academic and Clinical Affiliate of the University of Texas, Houston, USA Abstract Acute cholecystitis and other clinical problems requiring gallbladder removal or drainage have conventionally been treated with surgery, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or percutaneous transhepatic drainage of the gallbladder and/or extrahepatic bile duct. Patients unable to undergo these procedures due to functional status or anatomical anomalies are candidates for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided gallbladder drainage with stent placement. The aim of this review was to evaluate the technical feasibility and efficacy of EUS-guided placement of the recently developed lumen-apposing self-expandable metallic stent (LASEMS). A literature review was performed to identify the studies describing this technique. In this review article we have summarized case series or reports describing EUS-guided LASEMS placement. The indications, techniques, limitations and complications reported are discussed. A total of 78 patients were included across all studies described thus far in the literature. Studies have reported near 100% technical and clinical success rates in selected cases. No major complications were reported. EUS-guided gallbladder drainage and LASEMS placement can be a safe and effective alternative approach in the management of selected patients.
    [Show full text]