Literature DB >> 16996340

Advantage of EUS Trucut biopsy combined with fine-needle aspiration without immediate on-site cytopathologic examination.

Ian Storch1, Merce Jorda, Richard Thurer, Luis Raez, Caio Rocha-Lima, Stephen Vernon, Afonso Ribeiro.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasonographically guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is a safe and accurate method for obtaining diagnostic material from lesions within and immediately adjacent to the upper GI tract.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether EUS Trucut biopsy (EUS-TCB) (Quickcore, Wilson-Cook, Winstom Salem, NC) can increase the accuracy of EUS-guided tissue sampling when combined with FNA when no cytopathologist is present.
DESIGN: Retrospective case review.
SETTING: University-based referral practice. PATIENTS: All patients who had lesions that were accessible through the esophagus or stomach and that were greater than 20 mm and amenable to Trucut biopsy were included.
INTERVENTIONS: A total of 41 patients underwent both EUS-FNA and TCB with a separate pathologist evaluating each specimen. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The diagnostic performance of FNA, TCB, and its combination were compared.
RESULTS: The overall accuracy in our series was as follows: FNA, 76%; TCB, 76% (P not significant); and combination of FNA and TCB, 95% (P = .007). In the 26 patients with malignant diagnoses, the accuracy of combination was 100% versus 77% for FNA (P = .03). The median number of passes with the FNA and TCB was 4.4 (range 2-8) and 2.8 (range 2-5), respectively. One patient in the series had fever and chest pain after EUS biopsy. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study.
CONCLUSION: In our series EUS-TCB accuracy was equal to FNA when no on-site cytopathologist is present. TCB was helpful in the diagnosis of pancreatic masses, gastric submucosal lesions, lymphoma, and necrotic tumors. A 100% accuracy of FNA + TCB was seen in patients with malignant diseases and in patients who had failed or been refused biopsy by other modalities in the past. More data are needed before the exact role of TCB in the absence of on-site cytopathology can be accurately defined.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16996340     DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2006.02.056

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  34 in total

1.  Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration with 22- and 25-gauge needles in the same patients.

Authors:  Mitsuhiro Kida; Masao Araki; Shiro Miyazawa; Hiroko Ikeda; Miyoko Takezawa; Hidehiko Kikuchi; Maya Watanabe; Hiroshi Imaizumi; Wasaburo Koizumi
Journal:  J Interv Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-07-01

2.  Endoscopic ultrasound-guided Trucut biopsy of gastrointestinal mesenchymal tumor.

Authors:  John DeWitt; Robert E Emerson; Stuart Sherman; Mohammad Al-Haddad; Lee McHenry; Gregory A Cote; Julia K Leblanc
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2010-12-24       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided single-incision needle knife biopsy for gastric subepithelial tumors: comparison with resected specimens.

Authors:  Joon Sung Kim; Byung-Wook Kim; Gi Jun Kim; Young Wook Kim; Seung Ji Ryu; Sung Min Park; Jeong-Seon Ji; Sun Young Jun
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-06-28       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 4.  Endoscopic ultrasound advances, part 1: diagnosis.

Authors:  Edward Kim; Jennifer J Telford
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 3.522

5.  Trends and Challenges in Pathology Practice: Choices and necessities.

Authors:  Hassan Mh Kamel
Journal:  Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J       Date:  2011-02-12

6.  Diagnostic efficacy of the cell block method in comparison with smear cytology of tissue samples obtained by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration.

Authors:  Yutaka Noda; Naotaka Fujita; Go Kobayashi; Kei Itoh; Jun Horaguchi; Osamu Takasawa; Takashi Obana; Shinsuke Koshita; Yoshihide Kanno; Takashi Suzuki; Dai Hirasawa; Toshiki Sugawara; Tetsuya Ohira; Yoshihiro Harada; Takashi Tsuchiya; Takashi Sawai; Miwa Uzuki; Akira Kurose
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-02-23       Impact factor: 7.527

7.  Yields and Utility of Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided 19-Gauge Trucut Biopsy versus 22-Gauge Fine Needle Aspiration for Diagnosing Gastric Subepithelial Tumors.

Authors:  Hee Kyong Na; Jeong Hoon Lee; Young Soo Park; Ji Yong Ahn; Kwi-Sook Choi; Do Hoon Kim; Kee Don Choi; Ho June Song; Gin Hyug Lee; Hwoon-Yong Jung; Jin-Ho Kim
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2015-03-27

8.  Does onsite cytotechnology evaluation improve the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy?

Authors:  Fahad Alsohaibani; Safwat Girgis; Gurpal Singh Sandha
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 3.522

9.  Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and Trucut biopsy in thoracic lesions: when tissue is the issue.

Authors:  Ian Storch; Mubashir Shah; R Thurer; Elio Donna; A Ribeiro
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-05-04       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Ultrasound-guided vs endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for pancreatic cancer diagnosis.

Authors:  Masato Matsuyama; Hiroshi Ishii; Kensuke Kuraoka; Seigo Yukisawa; Akiyoshi Kasuga; Masato Ozaka; Sho Suzuki; Kouichi Takano; Yuko Sugiyama; Takao Itoi
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-04-21       Impact factor: 5.742

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.