Home > DARE Reviews > Systematic review of the impact of...
  • We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information

PubMed Health. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews [Internet]. York (UK): Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (UK); 1995-.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews.

Systematic review of the impact of endoscopic ultrasound on the management of patients with esophageal cancer

Review published: 2008.

Bibliographic details: Dyer SM, Levison DB, Chen RY, Lord SJ, Blamey S.  Systematic review of the impact of endoscopic ultrasound on the management of patients with esophageal cancer. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 2008; 24(1): 25-35. [PubMed: 18218166]

Quality assessment

The review assessed the impact of endoscopic ultrasound staging of oesophageal cancer on patient management and survival. The authors concluded that, whilst high quality evidence was not available, the therapeutic impact studies identified provided a higher level of evidence than test accuracy studies alone. These cautious conclusions were representative of the limited data available. Full critical summary

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Although endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) staging of esophageal cancer is established in clinical practice, high-quality evidence about its impact on patient outcomes is not available. This study aims to determine the impact of EUS for esophageal cancer staging on patient management and survival.

METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using Medline, PreMedline, Embase, and The Cochrane Library. Included studies were (i) comparative studies reporting survival following EUS esophageal cancer staging, (ii) therapeutic impact studies reporting change in patient management following EUS. The quality of included studies was critically appraised.

RESULTS: One systematic review, five studies reporting therapeutic impact, and two studies reporting patient survival were identified. The design and quality of the therapeutic impact studies varied widely. Management changed in 24-29 percent of patients following EUS staging of esophageal cancer (two studies). No studies provided data on the avoidance of surgery for this indication. One retrospective cohort study with historical control found EUS staging of esophageal cancer improved patient survival; a second study with similar design limitations did not find a survival benefit for EUS staging in patients undergoing resection. These studies had a high potential for bias, limiting the value of these findings.

CONCLUSIONS: Two studies provided evidence of a change in patient management following EUS for staging esophageal cancer, a higher level of evidence for a clinical benefit than can be obtained from accuracy studies alone. This evidence contributed to a recommendation for public funding of EUS in staging esophageal cancer in Australia.

CRD has determined that this article meets the DARE scientific quality criteria for a systematic review.

Copyright © 2014 University of York.

PubMed Health Blog...

read all...

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...