67 Lately, considerable emphasis has been placed on preoperative identification of a potentially involved circumferential surgical margin as a strong predictor of poor outcome after total mesorectal excision, and it has been suggested that MRI accurately predicts margin involvement.68,69 However, the few studies which claim to support this have significant methodological problems and further work, with improved study design, is needed before MRI is validated for this purpose.70 H 89 research buy As yet there is no evidence base for PET preoperative T and N staging of rectal cancer and the technique is not yet routinely used for this purpose.64,66 However, PET may assist in identifying systemic distant metastases when CT results are

equivocal.66 The various techniques that Selleck Ivacaftor have been applied to preoperative staging of rectal cancer have raised questions about the adequacy

of the existing TNM nomenclature for staging. It has therefore been suggested that each component of stage should be prefixed by an identifier for the source of information: “u” for ultrasound, “ct” for CT scan, “mr” for MRI scan, “p” for pathology, and “y” for staging following neoadjuvant therapy (and other more complex prefixes).71 Any move in this direction would be justifiable only if it leads to needed clarification in the transmission of staging results between practitioners and specialties, rather than further complicating an increasingly complex and unwieldy system. Despite enthusiasm in some quarters, the ability of EUS, CT, MRI and PET to preoperatively stage rectal cancer with high accuracy and consistency across a range of clinical environments has yet to be demonstrated. New technologies could lead to improvements but agreement about criteria for interpretation of images and issues of inter-observer reproducibility may remain highly problematic. The increasing use of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy has added to the complexity of staging. By convention, the postoperative staging of rectal carcinoma following neoadjuvant therapy reflects the extent of tumor present in the resected specimen and

does not give an indication of the spread of tumor prior to treatment. Grading systems have been devised to give an indication of response to neoadjuvant therapy,72 based on assessments of MCE公司 the extent of viable cancers cells and fibrosis. The prognostic significance of these measures remains to be determined. The staging of CRC is an evolving discipline in which the clinicopathological approach is now the accepted standard. The earlier focus of staging on predicting survival based on histopathological assessment of the operative specimen has broadened to encompass preoperative assessments by imaging and a range of potentially useful additional histological and molecular features. However, the strong association between traditional clinicopathological stage and patient survival has yet to be supplanted by any other prognostic indicators.