Diagnostic cytopathology · 2023
Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration cytology versus endoscopic biopsy for the diagnosis of subepithelial lesions of the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract: A 10-year retrospective single institution analysis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Collins Katrina, Yocum Bianca Puello, Mesa Hector, Cramer Harvey, Saeed Omer
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to compare the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) versus endoscopic biopsy for the diagnosis of gastrointestinal (GI) subepithelial lesions (SELs) using surgical resection as the gold standard.
METHODS: All patients who underwent EUS-FNA of upper and lower GI SELs over a 10-year period (2010 through 2019) were retrospectively reviewed. The medical records of all patients were reviewed and data extracted from the endoscopy, pathology, and surgical reports were analyzed.
RESULTS: In total, 283 patients with ages ranging from 21 to 92 years underwent EUS-FNA for evaluation of GI SELs, 117 (41%) patients underwent endoscopic biopsy and 82 (29%) patients had concurrent surgical resection specimen. EUS-FNA was obtained from the stomach in 167 (59%) patients, duodenum in 51 (18%) patients, esophagus in 38 (13%) patients, and colorectum in 27 (10%) patients. It was found that the largest percentage of lesions originated in the muscularis propria (36%), followed by the submucosa (26%), deep mucosa (13%), and not specified in 21%. The concordance between EUS-FNA and endoscopic biopsy was good (correlation coefficient of 0.631, p < .001). EUS-FNA versus endoscopic biopsy in resected cases showed sensitivity and specificity of 78% versus 68% and 84% versus 100%, respectively. The EUS-FNA has an accuracy of 80% compared to 74% in biopsy. The diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA and endoscopic biopsy was 64% versus 55%.
CONCLUSION: EUS-FNA is more sensitive and more accurate than endoscopic biopsy for diagnosing GI SELs with a good concordance between the two techniques.
METHODS: All patients who underwent EUS-FNA of upper and lower GI SELs over a 10-year period (2010 through 2019) were retrospectively reviewed. The medical records of all patients were reviewed and data extracted from the endoscopy, pathology, and surgical reports were analyzed.
RESULTS: In total, 283 patients with ages ranging from 21 to 92 years underwent EUS-FNA for evaluation of GI SELs, 117 (41%) patients underwent endoscopic biopsy and 82 (29%) patients had concurrent surgical resection specimen. EUS-FNA was obtained from the stomach in 167 (59%) patients, duodenum in 51 (18%) patients, esophagus in 38 (13%) patients, and colorectum in 27 (10%) patients. It was found that the largest percentage of lesions originated in the muscularis propria (36%), followed by the submucosa (26%), deep mucosa (13%), and not specified in 21%. The concordance between EUS-FNA and endoscopic biopsy was good (correlation coefficient of 0.631, p < .001). EUS-FNA versus endoscopic biopsy in resected cases showed sensitivity and specificity of 78% versus 68% and 84% versus 100%, respectively. The EUS-FNA has an accuracy of 80% compared to 74% in biopsy. The diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA and endoscopic biopsy was 64% versus 55%.
CONCLUSION: EUS-FNA is more sensitive and more accurate than endoscopic biopsy for diagnosing GI SELs with a good concordance between the two techniques.