北京药材批发市场在哪:Rectal Cancer

来源:百度文库 编辑:北方网 时间:2019/10/19 23:04:31
Rectal Cancer - MR imaging
by Max Lahaye, Regina Beets-Tan and Robin Smithuis
Radiology Departement of the Maastricht University Hospital and the Rijnland Hospital in Leiderdorp, , the Netherlands
IntroductionTotal mesorectal excisionCircumferential resection marginLocation of the tumorLow rectal cancerT-stage and CRMT1 and T2T3 CRM-T3 CRM+T4N-stageMR protocol Radiological reportTreatmentCases
back to overview   print
Publicationdate: 19-12-2010
The major advancement in the treatment of rectal cancer is total mesorectal excision (TME), which involves complete removal of the tumor along with the mesorectal tissue which contains the lymphatics.
The other advancement is the shift from adjuvant to neoadjuvant radiotherapy.
Both have dramatically changed the local recurrence rates and survival.
The issue is whether a patient with rectal cancer is candidate for TME only or preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by TME.
MRI can answer that question, since it is the most accurate tool for the local staging of rectal cancer.
Introduction

Images can be enlarged by clicking on them.
Traditionally rectal cancer surgery consisted of excision of the tumor with a margin of surrounding perirectal fat.
This however resulted in high local recurrence rates up to 40%.
In 1982 the surgeon Richard John Heald introduced the total mesorectal excision.
After many years TME was widely accepted, which caused a drop in local recurrence rates from 40% to 11% (1,2).
The role of MRI is to determine whether TME-surgery is possible or whether there is an advanced tumor that should be treated with chemoradiation and followed by TME in a later stage.

Total mesorectal excision
Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the best surgical treatment for rectal cancer provided that the resection margin is free of tumor.
In TME the entire mesorectal compartment including the rectum, surrounding mesorectal fat, perirectal lymph nodes and its envelope, i.e. the mesorectal fascia is completely removed (figure).
This minimizes the chance of tumor remnants in the surgical bed.
On the left a coronal illustration of the rectum with a tumor extending through the rectal wall into the mesorectal fat and with some lymph nodes.
The resection margin along the mesorectal fascia is free of tumor and a TME can be performed.
Notice the anal verge (blue arrow).

Rectum is surrounded by mesorectal fat within the mesorectal fascia (red arrows).
P: prostate and V: seminal vesicles.
On MRI the mesorectal fat has a high signal intensity on T1- and T2-weighted images.
The mesorectal fat is bounded by the mesorectal fascia, which is seen as a fine line of low signal intensity (red arrows).
In a TME the mesorectal fascia is the resection plane.
The shortest distance from the tumor or lymph nodes to the mesorectal fat is called the cirumferential resection margin (CRM).
It is the most powerful predictor for local recurrence.
MR is highly accurate for the prediction of the CRM.
A positive resection margin or CRM+ is when there are tumor deposists within 1 mm of the fascia.
CRM- is when the distance to the fascia is > 1 mm.

Circumferential resection margin
On the left an illustration with: T2-tumor limited to the bowel wall T3-tumor with a wide circumferential resection margin or T3 CRM- T3-tumor with an involved circumferential resection margin or T3 CRM+ (red arrow) T4-tumor with ingrowth into seminal vesicles and prostate
 
Whenever there are lymph nodes within 1 mm of the mesorectal fascia we need to report this , especially when they are large, because the CRM may be involved (blue arrow).

MRI has to determine the following: Location of the tumor
Is it a low or high rectal tumor, what is the size, circumferential growth? T-stage
T1/T2, T3 or T4 Circumferential resection margin
Is there tumor growth or lymphnodes within 1 mm of the resection margin? N-stage
Are there any lymphnodes within the mesorectum or beyond the mesorectum?
 
Location of the tumor

The rectum extends from the anorectal junction to the sigmoid.
The rectosigmoid junction is arbitrarily defined as 15 cm above the anal verge.
A tumor more than 15 cm above the anal verge is regarded and treated as a sigmoid tumor.
Since we cannot detect the anal verge on MR, it is best to measure from the anorectal angle.
Rectal cancer can be divided into: Low rectal cancer:
distal border is 0- 5 cm from the anal verge. Mid rectal cancer:
distal border is 5-10 cm from the anal verge High rectal cancer:
distal border is 10-15 cm from the anal verge
 

Low rectal cancer
Low rectal cancer has a higher local recurrence rate.
The distal tapering of the mesorectal fat implies that low rectal cancer more easily invades the surrounding structures and it will be more difficult for the surgeon to get a tumor free resection (see figure).
T-stage and CRM

When we know the exact location of the tumor, the next step is to determine the T-stage.
MR cannot distinguish tumor growth limited to the submucosa or invasion to the muscularis externa, so it cannot differentiate between T1 and T2 tumors.
In most cases these tumors are both treated with TME-surgery, so it is not necessary to make the difference.
In a minority of cases a T1 tumor will be treated with local excision.
In these cases endorectal US is accurate for staging these superficial tumors.

T1 and T2
T1 and T2 tumors are limited to the bowel wall and have a good prognosis.
They can be accurately identified with MR, because the rectal wall will have an intact black line, i.e. musclaris externa, surrounding the tumor (3).
On the left a rectal tumor that is completely surrounded by the black layer of the musculari externa.
This is a T2 tumor.

T3 CRM- rectal cancer
T3 CRM-
A T3 tumor grows through all wall layers and extends into the perirectal fat tissue.
In these tumors it is important to determine whether the circumferential resection margin is involved.
On the left a tumor that probably infiltrates the mesorectal fat, i.e. T3 (arrow).
There is a wide resection margin around the tumor and there are no lymphnodes adjacent to the mesorectal fascia.
This tumor is classified as T3 CRM-.
In the Netherlands, like in most european countries, this patient will be treated with a short preoperative course of radiotherapy followed by TME.

Perirectal stranding
MRI has a sensitivity of 82% to detect perirectal tissue invasion.
The pitfall is when perirectal stranding is seen.
This can be the result of tumor ingrowth or a desmoplastic reaction.
To be on the safe side and to avoid understaging, it is advised to stage tumors with perirectal stranding as T3 tumors.
On the left two tumors with a similar MR-appearance.
In A there was perirectal tumor invasion.
In B there was a tumor limited to the bowel wall, i.e. a T2-tumor.
The perirectal stranding in this latter case was the result of a desmoplastic reaction.
For therapeutic purposes it does not have any consequences to differentiate accurately between a T2 CRM- and a T3 CRM- tumor.
Both tumors will be treated with a preoperative low dose radiotherapy of 5x5 Gy followed by TME.

T3 CRM+ rectal cancer
T3 CRM+
On the left a tumor that infiltrates the mesorectal fat with infiltration of the resection margin on the anterior side (arrow).
This tumor is classified as T3 CRM+.
This patient will be treated with a long course of radiotherapy and chemotherapy preoperatively.
If this treatment is succesful, it will be followed by TME.

Rectal cancer with invasion of the prostate
T4
A T4 tumor is an advanced tumor that invades surrounding structures like pelvic wall, vagina, prostate, bladder or seminal vesicles.
These patients require a long course of chemoradiation and extensive surgery.
For adjacent organ invasion all imaging modalities show similar sensitivity: 70% for transrectal US, 72% for CT and 74% for MR imaging.
On the left a T4-tumor with invasion of the prostate.
N-stage

The N-stage is an important risk factor for local recurrence.
Unfortunately MR, like any other imaging modality, has a low sensitivity and specificity for the detection of lymph node metastases.
When lymph nodes have a short axis of > 5 mm or a spiculated and indistinct border or a mottled heterogeneous appearance, than you can be sure that these nodes contain metastases.
However not all positive lymph nodes meet these criteria.

Even in T1 and T2 tumors there is a considerable risk for lymph node metastases (Table).

The low sensitivity using only size criteria can be explained by the fact that in rectal cancer small lymph nodes still have a high prevalence of malignancy, 9% in 1-2 mm nodes and 17% in 2-5 mm nodes respectively (11).
As is demonstrated in the table on the left the majority of positive nodes are 1-5 mm in size.
In order not to understage patients, all lymph nodes are regarded as possible malignant.

On the left a low rectal cancer with multiple nodes in the perirectal fat on the posterior side.
This has a big influence on the prognosis of the patient and based on the advanced stage of the tumor with CRM+ and N+ status, the patient will therefore receive a more aggressive treatment with neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

Local recurrence of rectal cancer after TME due to positive extramesorectal lymph nodes
It is important to look beyond the mesorectum for lymph nodes (arrow).
These extramesorectal nodes are important, because they can be a cause of local recurrence.
When they are detected by MR, the radiation and surgical planning has to be adapted.
On the left a patient with extramesorectal nodal recurrence after TME (arrow).
During a standard TME procedure these extramesorectal lymph nodes will not be resected.
This means that after TME surgery not all tumor deposits will have been removed.
The finding of malignant extramesorectal lymph nodes entails that at least a more extensive surgical approach is necessary to remove all the cancer deposits or a boost of radiotherapy to the areas of risk.
If not, a nodal recurrence, as shown here, is imminent.

On the left axial T2-weighted images of two different rectal cancer patients.
These cases illustrate the problems for a radiologist to accurately stage the nodal status.
On the far left there is a small extra mesorectal lymph node depicted.
On the right there are numerous large mesorectal lymph nodes and also a right extramesorectal lymph node with indistinct borders (red arrow).
Although the nodes of these two patients have very different characteristics in size, border and heterogenous appearance, they all proved to be malignant.
Rectal cancer is notorious for small nodes (< 5 mm) that can harbor small metastasis.
MR protocol

Only FSE T2 and no Gadolinium
The only sequence that is required is a T2-weighted fast spin echo sequence.
Gadolinium-enhanced MR does not improve diagnostic accuracy and is therefore not included in the protocol.
Images are made in the sagittal, coronal and axial plane.
First start with the sagittal series and plan the axial images perpendicular to the rectal wall at the level of the tumor (blue lines).
Coronal images are planned perpendicular to the axial images (yellow line).
In this way we avoid partial volume artefacts and will be able to accurately evaluate the depth of tumor invasion.
It helps if the level of the tumor position is indicated by the referring surgeon for proper planning of the MR-sequences.
The cranial border of the field of view (FOV) is L5, the caudal border is below the anal canal.

Angulation
Axial images have to be abgulated perpendicular to the axis of the tumor to avoid volume averaging.
At first the axial images were not properly angulated. This resulted in the false impression, that the circumferential resection margin was involved on the anterior side (red circle).
After proper angulation it was noted, that the CRM was not involved (yellow circle).

No fat suppression and no bowelpreparation
Fat suppression is not helpfull in delineating the tumor.
Patients do not need bowel or any other preparation.
The use of rectal contrast is not advised, because stretching of the bowel wall may lead to overestimation of an involved CRM.
Furthermore the mesorectal nodes in the distal mesorectum are not well appreciated.
Radiological report
The radiological report must consist of the following tumor variables: Location of the tumor in low, mid or high rectum. Length of the tumor for surgical planning. Circular / semi-circular.
Circular tumors can create a stenosis of the rectum and most often these are more aggressive tumors. T-stage: T1 / T2: tumor limited to the bowel wall T3: perirectal fat invasion T4: invasion of surrounding structures. Mention which organs are involved.
Circumferential resection margin in mm on anterior, posterior and lateral side. N-stage: nodes inside of the mesorectum and mention distance to resection margin and look for nodes outside mesorectum.
 
Treatment
There are differences in rectal cancer treatment between countries and between institutions.
Everyone agrees that TME is the best radical treatment for all tumors with free resection margins.
In the Netherlands, like in most european countries, a short course of 5x5Gy radiotherapy is given to the majority of patients prior to TME, because additional benefit was seen in the large TME trial.
In some institutions this preoperative radiotherapy is not given to tumors that already have a good prognosis, like high-rectal T1N0 and T2N0.
Preoperative short course of radiotherapy immediately followed by TME does not result in down-staging and is therefore not suitable for locally advanced tumors.
That is why all T4-tumors or tumors with involved resection margins and tumors with suspicious malignant lymph nodes near the resection margin and beyond the first receive high dose chemoradiation.
Further action depends on the response to the preoperative treatment.
In cases of tumor regression from the mesorectal fascia this will be a less extensive resection.
In cases of tumor downstaging to only a small tumor remnant and sterilized nodes (yN0) it can be a local excision.
In cases of complete tumor regression and yN0 it can even be a 'wait and see' with omission of surgery.
This latter option however is still controversial and not standard practise.
Cases

case 1
Radiology report: At 0.5 cm above the anorectal junction there is tumor dorsally in the rectal wall. The tumor length is 3.5 cm. The tumor invades the perirectal fat and has a close relation with the muscles of the pelvic floor especially on the right side. At 7 o' clock the CRM is < 1mm. There are no malignant (> 5mm) mesorectal lymph nodes.
 
Conclusion:
Low-rectal T3N0 tumor with an involved CRM at the pelvic floor muscles on the right side.

case 2
Radiology report: At 6 cm above the anorectal junction there is circular tumor in the rectal wall. The tumor length is 5.5 cm. The tumor invades the perirectal fat and has a close relation with the peritoneal fold. There are only a few small mesorectal lymph nodes (not all depicted): not suspicious.
 
Conclusion:
Midrectal T3N0 tumor close to the peritoneal fold.

case 3
Radiology report: At 10 cm above the anorectal junction there is a circular tumor in the rectal wall. The tumor length is 7.0 cm. The tumor invades perirectal fat and has an involved peritoneal fold at 9 to 11 o' clock. There are lymph nodes, that are larger than 8 mm, which makes them very suspicious for malignancy. At various levels more than 4 nodes were detected, i.e. N2. No malignant extramesorectal lymph nodes visible.
 
Conclusion:
High-rectal T3N2 tumor with an involved CRM on the right ventral side.
References
Recurrence and survival after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer.
Heald RJ, Ryall RD.
Lancet 1986; 1:1479- 1482.The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery: the clue to pelvic recurrence?
by R. J. Heald, E. M. Husband, R. D. H. Ryall
British Journal of Surgery Volume 69, Issue 10, pages 613-616, October 1982Surgical management of locally recurrent rectal cancer.
by Sagar PM, Pemberton JH
Br J Surg 83:293-304, 1996Rectal Cancer: Review with Emphasis on MR Imaging
by Regina Beets-Tan and Geerard Beets
August 2004 Radiology, 232, 335-346. Accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in prediction of tumour-free resection margin in rectal cancer surgery.
by Beets-Tan RG, Beets GL, Vliegen RF, et al
Lancet 357:497-504, 2001Rectal Cancer: Local Staging and Assessment of Lymph Node Involvement with Endoluminal US, CT, and MR Imaging; A Meta-Analysis
by Bipat S, Glas AS, Slors FJ, Zwinderman AH, Bossuyt PM, Stoker J
Radiology 232:773-783, 2004Morphologic Predictors of Lymph Node Status in Rectal Cancer with Use of High-Spatial-Resolution MR Imaging with Histopathologic Comparison
Brown G, Richards CJ, Bourne MW, et al
Radiology 227:371-377, 2003High-resolution MR imaging for nodal staging in rectal cancer: are there any criteria in addition to the size?
by Kim JH, Beets GL, Kim MJ, Kessels AG, Beets- Tan RG.
Eur J Radiol 2004; 52:78-83A Systematic Approach to the Interpretation of Preoperative Staging MRI for Rectal Cancer
by Fiona Taylor et al
AJR 2008; 191:1827-1835Preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision for resectable rectal cancer.
by Kapiteijn E, Marijnen CA, Nagtegaal ID, et al
N Engl J Med 2001; 345:638-646Patterns of neoplastic foci and lymph node micrometastasis within the mesorectum (pdf)
Wang C, Zhou Z, Wang Z, et al
Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2005;390:311;318