The Value of Multi-parametric Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Assessment of Tumor Regression Grade of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer after Treatment
返回论文页
|更新时间:2023-10-11
|
The Value of Multi-parametric Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Assessment of Tumor Regression Grade of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer after Treatment
Journal of Clinical Ultrasound in MedicineVol. 25, Issue 5, (2023)
作者机构:
四川大学华西医院超声医学科
作者简介:
基金信息:
DOI:
CLC:
Published:2023,
Published Online:26 May 2023,
扫 描 看 全 文
The Value of Multi-parametric Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Assessment of Tumor Regression Grade of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer after Treatment. [J]. Journal of Clinical Ultrasound in Medicine 25(5).(2023)
DOI:
The Value of Multi-parametric Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Assessment of Tumor Regression Grade of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer after Treatment. [J]. Journal of Clinical Ultrasound in Medicine 25(5).(2023)DOI:
The Value of Multi-parametric Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Assessment of Tumor Regression Grade of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer after Treatment
Objective: To investigate the value of combining multiple parameters of trans-rectal ultrasonography (TRUS) to assess the efficacy of neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NCRT) for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC),and compare it with magnetic resonance tumor regression grade(mrTRG). Methods: Data were collected on 96 patients with LARC who underwent total mesenteric resection (TME) after NCRT. According to the pathological tumor regression grading (pTRG)
patients were divided into good response group (pTRG 0 and 1
34 cases) and poor response group (pTRG 2 and 3
62 cases). Clinical and ultrasound data before and after treatment were collected
including the age
sex
CEA
CA199 of the patient and distance from the lower edge of the tumor to the Hilton line (Intersphincteric Groove)
long diameter and thick diameter of the tumor
the peak systolic velocity (PSV) of the major arteries within the tumor
the resistance index (RI)
and the contrast enhanced ultrasound inhomogeneity grade of the tumor (CEUS-IG). The differences in ultrasound parameters between the two groups were compared
and the parameters that differed between the groups were analyzed by binary logistic regression to establish a multi-parameter prediction model and their predictive efficacy were compared with mrTRG. Results: Before NCRT
the differences of all ultrasound parameters between the two groups were not statistically significant (p>0.05); after NCRT
the differences of CEUS-IGpost
tumor long-diameter change rate
PSV change rate
and downgrade of CEUS-IG (ΔCEUS-IG) were statistically significant in the two groups (p<0.05); the differences in the remaining clinical and ultrasound parameters between the two groups were not statistically significant. The cut-off values of tumor length diameter change rate and PSV change rate were 26.0% and 22.5%
and the accuracy were 63.50% and 68.75%
respectively; The accuracy of ΔCEUS-IG was 71.90%
which was lower than that of mrTRG (83.33%
p<0.05); the accuracy of CEUS-IGpost in predicting pTRG was 83.30%
which was comparable to that of mrTRG (p>0.05). The accuracy of the established regression prediction model was 84.4%
with an AUC of 0.917
and its accuracy was not statistically significant (p>0.05) from both CEUS-IGpost and mrTRG. Conclusion: Parameters CEUS-IGpost
tumor length-diameter change rate
PSV change rate
and ΔCEUS-IG after NCRT could be used to distinguish the good response group and the poor response group of NCRT
and the multi-parametric ultrasound may have comparable value of applications with mrTRG in assessing the efficacy of rectal cancer after NCRT.