RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The radiologist and oncologist are often confident that biopsy will confirm their suspicion of recurrent disease, but a biopsy is performed to confirm the histologic diagnosis before beginning or altering therapy. We have examined data to determine how often the biopsied lesion represents recurrent disease from the primary tumor or is an instance of new cancer, and whether recurrent disease can be predicted. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed the medical and imaging records of 253 patients who underwent CT-guided biopsy of an abdominal or pelvic lesion between 1993 and 1996. Sixty-nine of the 253 patients had a previously diagnosed primary tumor and were being examined for possible tumor recurrence or metastasis. The images of these 69 patients were analyzed to determine if the pattern of disease was typical of recurrence or metastasis. RESULTS: In 55 of the 69 patients, the pattern was judged to be typical of metastatic or recurrent disease. Biopsy confirmed this suspicion in all 55 patients. In 14 of the 69 patients, the pattern of spread was judged not to be typical of recurrence or metastasis. These 14 patients were found to have a new primary tumor (n = 4), benign processes (n = 2), and recurrences (n = 8). CONCLUSION: Of the patients for whom radiographic findings suggested recurrence, we found no patients in whom a new primary tumor would have been missed if biopsy had been avoided. Data should now be acquired prospectively to determine whether it may be prudent to make treatment decisions on the basis of imaging findings alone, without histologic confirmation.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Abdominales/diagnóstico , Biopsia con Aguja , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X , Neoplasias Abdominales/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias Abdominales/secundario , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/diagnóstico , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/diagnóstico por imagen , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Radiografía Abdominal , Estudios Retrospectivos , Sensibilidad y EspecificidadRESUMEN
The cause of laryngeal and pharyngeal carcinomas is likely multifactorial. Smoking is an important factor, but mucosal damage from gastroesophageal reflux may also contribute. The purpose of this study was to determine whether gastroesophageal reflux is more common in patients with laryngeal or pharyngeal carcinomas than in those without these malignancies. Over an 8-year period, we correlated the results of clinical and radiographic examinations of the pharynx and esophagus to pH monitoring results in 798 patients with a variety of upper aerodigestive tract symptoms and who underwent both pH monitoring and barium esophagography. In this group, 63 patients (52 men, 11 women) had laryngeal or pharyngeal carcinomas, and 735 patients (319 men, 416 women) had neither malignancy. Abnormal pH findings were defined as a total percentage of esophageal acid exposure time of 6% or more as determined with the esophageal probe, or any reflux event detected with the pharyngeal probe. Thirty-four of 63 patients with carcinomas (54%) had abnormal pH-monitoring results: Esophageal acid exposure was abnormal in 10 patients, pharyngeal acid exposure was abnormal in 7 patients, and acid exposure was abnormal in both areas in 17 patients. Of the 735 patients without malignancies, 365 (50%) had abnormal pH-monitoring results (p > 0.05). In this population of patients, abnormal results of pH monitoring were common, occurring in 399 (50%) of 798 patients, but no significant difference was found between results in those with and without laryngeal or pharyngeal carcinomas. Therefore, our study found that gastroesophageal reflux as shown by pH monitoring was not more common in patients with these malignancies.