Postgraduate medicine · 2024
EUS-guided tissue acquisition in patients with solid pseudopapillary neoplasms of the pancreas.
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.
Jiménez-Gutiérrez José M, de la Mora-Levy José G, Alonso-Lárraga Juan O, Hernández-Guerrero Angélica I, Soriano-Herrera Betsabé A, Villegas-González Lidia F, Uscanga-Domínguez Luis F, López-Romero Stephanie, Téllez-Ávila Félix I
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) has been the most common method used for the preoperative cytopathological diagnosis of solid tumors of the pancreas. There are only a few reported cases about the role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) in the pre-operative diagnosis of solid pseudopapillary neoplasms (SPN). This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic yield of EUS-TA,including endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) andEUS-FNB, in patients with SPN.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with EUS-TA for SPN diagnosis in 2 referral centers. The primary outcome was the diagnostic yield of EUS-TA compared to the surgical specimen.
RESULTS: Seventy-four patients with SPN of the pancreas were identified. Eighteen had a EUS-TA (10 EUS-FNB and 8 EUS-FNA). The median age of the patients was 31 years (IQR 21-38), and all patients were women. The most common presenting symptom was abdominal pain. Most of the tumors were in the head of the pancreas (9/18; 50%). The median tumor size by EUS was 4.5 cm (min-max 2-15 cm). The most common appearance on EUS was a solid lesion (n = 8/18, 44.4%). A definitive presurgical cytopathological diagnosis was obtained in 16/18 patients (88.8%) with EUS-TA. The sensitivity and positive predictive value of the EUS-TA were 94% each. One patient in the EUS-FNB group developed mild acute pancreatitis.
CONCLUSION: The diagnostic yield of the EUS-TA in SPN is high. In most cases, the diagnosis was obtained with the first procedure. No differences in the diagnostic yield or AEs between EUS-FNA vs. EUS-FNB needles were seen.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with EUS-TA for SPN diagnosis in 2 referral centers. The primary outcome was the diagnostic yield of EUS-TA compared to the surgical specimen.
RESULTS: Seventy-four patients with SPN of the pancreas were identified. Eighteen had a EUS-TA (10 EUS-FNB and 8 EUS-FNA). The median age of the patients was 31 years (IQR 21-38), and all patients were women. The most common presenting symptom was abdominal pain. Most of the tumors were in the head of the pancreas (9/18; 50%). The median tumor size by EUS was 4.5 cm (min-max 2-15 cm). The most common appearance on EUS was a solid lesion (n = 8/18, 44.4%). A definitive presurgical cytopathological diagnosis was obtained in 16/18 patients (88.8%) with EUS-TA. The sensitivity and positive predictive value of the EUS-TA were 94% each. One patient in the EUS-FNB group developed mild acute pancreatitis.
CONCLUSION: The diagnostic yield of the EUS-TA in SPN is high. In most cases, the diagnosis was obtained with the first procedure. No differences in the diagnostic yield or AEs between EUS-FNA vs. EUS-FNB needles were seen.