
AbstractObjectivesIndividual treatment strategies for esophageal cancer have been investigated based on the anatomical subsite classification. Accurate subsite classification based on these anatomical landmarks is thus important. We investigated the suitability of the existing endoscopic classification and explored alternative landmarks for esophageal subsite classification.MethodsPatients who received endoscopic ultrasonography (and computed tomography scans for surveillance of esophageal cancer treatment or esophageal submucosal tumors were included. Distances between anatomical landmarks, including the inferior cricoid cartilage border, superior border of the sternum, and tracheal bifurcation, were measured using a combination of endoscopic ultrasonography, computed tomography, and other information.ResultsThe mean (standard deviation) distances from the superior incisor dentition to the pharynx–esophagus, cervical–upper thoracic esophagus, and upper–middle thoracic esophagus boundaries were 16.9 (1.7), 21.7 (1.9), and 29.0 (1.9) cm, respectively. However, variances in the differences between the mean and individual distances were large (2.8, 3.4, and 3.7, respectively), mainly because of differences in body height. However, variances in the differences between individual distances and novel endoscopic landmarks, including the lower end of the pyriform sinus and lower end of compression of the left main bronchus, were lower (1.7, 1.2, and 0.6, respectively).ConclusionsExisting indicators of esophageal subsite boundaries were not consistent with anatomical boundaries. Modification of the distance from the superior incisor dentition based on average distances from anatomical landmarks or the use of alternative endoscopic landmarks is recommended to provide more suitable anatomical boundaries.
esophagus, pharynx, classification, landmark, RC799-869, Original Articles, endoscopy, Diseases of the digestive system. Gastroenterology
esophagus, pharynx, classification, landmark, RC799-869, Original Articles, endoscopy, Diseases of the digestive system. Gastroenterology
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 5 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
