Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19023632›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2009

Use of positron emission tomography in surgery follow-up of esophageal cancer.

P Teyton, J P Metges, A Atmani, V Jestin-Le Tallec, A Volant, D Visvikis, J P Bail, O Pradier, P Lozac'h, Catherine Cheze Le Rest

Abstract readControlled Clinical Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2017
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Role of precision imaging in esophageal cancer.Journal of thoracic disease · 2020
    Review
  4. Diagnostic value of surveillanceEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2019
    Article
  5. The British journal of radiology · 2018
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. The value of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose-PET/CT in oesophageal cancer.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2011
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

P TeytonNuclear Medicine Department, CHU Brest, Morvan Hospital, 29609 Brest, France.
J P Metges
A Atmani
V Jestin-Le Tallec
A Volant
D Visvikis
J P Bail
O Pradier
P Lozac'h
Catherine Cheze Le Rest
Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Brest · FRLaboratoire de Traitement de l'Information Médicale · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAlthough the prognosis of patients with esophageal cancer has been improved by extended dissection, the incidence of recurrence still remains high. In esophageal cancer, positron emission tomography (PET) using (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) already demonstrated to be useful for initial staging and monitoring response to therapy. This prospective study compared the ability of FDG-PET and conventional imaging to detect early recurrence of esophageal cancer after initial surgery in asymptomatic patients. MATERIALS AND

methodsBetween October 2003 and September 2006, 41 patients with esophageal cancer were included in a prospective study after initial radical esophagectomy. FDG-PET, thoracoabdominal computed tomography (CT), abdominal ultrasonography, and endoscopy were performed every 6 months after initial treatment. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Twenty-three patients had recurrent disease (56%), mostly within the first 6 months after surgery (70%). Despite two false-positive scans due to postoperative changes, FDG-PET was more accurate than CT (91% vs. 81%, p = 0.02) for the detection of recurrence with a sensitivity of 100% (vs. 65%), a specificity of 85% (vs. 91%), and a negative predictive value of 100% on a patient-by-patient-based analysis. For the detection of locoregional recurrence, FDG-PET was more accurate than CT (96.2% vs. 88.9%). FDG-PET was also more accurate than CT for the detection of distant metastases (92.5% vs. 84.9%), especially when involving either bones (100%) or liver (98.1%). A lower sensitivity of FDG-PET (57%) for the early detection of small lung metastases did not affect patient management (accuracy = 92.5%).

conclusionFDG-PET appears to be very useful for the systematic follow-up of asymptomatic patients after esophagectomy with an initial scan performed 6 months after surgery.

Indexed as

Positron-Emission TomographyAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCarcinomaDisease-Free SurvivalEsophageal NeoplasmsEsophagectomyFemaleFluorodeoxyglucose F18Follow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPredictive Value of TestsFluorodeoxyglucose F18Radiopharmaceuticals

Identifiers

PMID19023632
OpenAlexW2095104234

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.