Search

PURPOSEWe aimed to evaluate the relationship between gastrectomy and the volume of liver segments II and III in patients with gastric cancer.METHODSComputed tomography images of 54 patients who underwent curative gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma were retrospectively evaluated by two blinded observers. Volumes of the total liver and segments II and III were measured. The difference between preoperative and postoperative volume measurements was compared.RESULTSTotal liver volumes measured by both observers in the preoperative and postoperative scans were similar (P > 0.05). High correlation was found between both observers (preoperative r=0.99; postoperative r=0.98). Total liver volumes showed a mean reduction of 13.4% after gastrectomy (P = 0.977). The mean volume of segments II and III showed similar decrease in measurements of both observers (38.4% vs. 36.4%, P = 0.363); the correlation between the observers were high (preoperative r=0.97, P < 0.001; postoperative r=0.99, P < 0.001). Volume decrease in the rest of the liver was not different between the observers (8.2% vs. 9.1%, P = 0.388). Time had poor correlation with volume change of segments II and III and the total liver for each observer (observer 1, rseg2/3=0.32, rtotal=0.13; observer 2, rseg2/3=0.37, rtotal=0.16).CONCLUSIONSegments II and III of the liver showed significant atrophy compared with the rest of the liver and the total liver after gastrectomy. Volume reduction had poor correlation with time.

PURPOSEWe aimed to evaluate preoperative T and N staging and retroperitoneal surgical margin (RSM) involvement in colon cancer using multidetector computed tomography (MDCT).METHODSIn this retrospective study, preoperative MDCTs of 141 patients with colon adenocarcinoma were evaluated in terms of T and N staging and retroperitoneal surgical margin involvement by two observers. Results were compared with histopathology.RESULTSIn determining extramural invasion, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy of MDCT were 81%, 50%, 95%, 26%, and 81% for observer 1 and 87%, 75%, 97%, 27%, and 84% for observer 2, respectively. Moderate interobserver agreement was observed (ĸ=0.425). In determining T stage of the tumor, accuracy of MDCT was 55% for observer 1 and 51% for observer 2. In the detection of lymph node metastasis, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of MDCT were 84%, 46%, 60%, 74% and 64% for observer 1 and 84%, 56%, 65%, 78%, and 70% for observer 2, respectively. Interobserver agreement was substantial (ĸ=0.650). RSM was involved in six cases (4.7%). When only retroperitoneal colon segments were considered, 1.6% of subjects demonstrated RSM involvement. Four of the six RSM-positive tumors were located on sigmoid colon and one tumor was on transverse colon and caecum. Considering all colon tumors, in the detection of RSM involvement, sensitivity and specificity of MDCT were 33% and 81% for observer 1 and 50% and 80% for observer 2. Interobserver agreement was moderate (ĸ=0.518).CONCLUSIONMDCT is a promising technique with moderate interobserver agreement in detection of extramural invasion, lymph node metastases, and RSM involvement in colon carcinomas.