BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is accurate in diagnosing pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (PNETs), but its impact on surgical management is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether preoperative EUS findings altered the decision for, and extent of, surgery in patients with PNETs. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients referred for EUS because of suspected PNETs was conducted. The diagnosis of PNETs was confirmed by EUS-guided fine needle aspiration cytology, where indicated, or by surgical histology. EUS findings were compared with computed tomography (CT) findings to determine whether there was an impact on the decision for surgical management. RESULTS: Fourteen patients (10 women), with a mean age of 44 years, underwent EUS for suspected PNETs. PNETs were seen with CT in 10 of 13 patients (77%) and with EUS in 14 of 14 patients (100%). One obese patient could not fit into the CT scanner. This patient had five PNETs on EUS. Three patients with a normal CT scan were determined to have one or two PNETs on EUS. Three patients with one or two PNETs on CT were found to have five to eight PNETs on EUS. EUS altered the decision for possible surgical management in five of 14 patients (36%), either by identifying a PNET or by finding multiple and multifocal PNETs that were not visualized on CT scans. CONCLUSION: EUS is useful in the preoperative assessment of PNETs by providing information that significantly influences the decision for surgical intervention or changes the extent of the planned surgery.
BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is accurate in diagnosing pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (PNETs), but its impact on surgical management is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether preoperative EUS findings altered the decision for, and extent of, surgery in patients with PNETs. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients referred for EUS because of suspected PNETs was conducted. The diagnosis of PNETs was confirmed by EUS-guided fine needle aspiration cytology, where indicated, or by surgical histology. EUS findings were compared with computed tomography (CT) findings to determine whether there was an impact on the decision for surgical management. RESULTS: Fourteen patients (10 women), with a mean age of 44 years, underwent EUS for suspected PNETs. PNETs were seen with CT in 10 of 13 patients (77%) and with EUS in 14 of 14 patients (100%). One obesepatient could not fit into the CT scanner. This patient had five PNETs on EUS. Three patients with a normal CT scan were determined to have one or two PNETs on EUS. Three patients with one or two PNETs on CT were found to have five to eight PNETs on EUS. EUS altered the decision for possible surgical management in five of 14 patients (36%), either by identifying a PNET or by finding multiple and multifocal PNETs that were not visualized on CT scans. CONCLUSION: EUS is useful in the preoperative assessment of PNETs by providing information that significantly influences the decision for surgical intervention or changes the extent of the planned surgery.
Authors: N J Owen; S A Sohaib; P D Peppercorn; J P Monson; A B Grossman; G M Besser; R H Reznek Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2001-10 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Muslim Atiq; Manoop S Bhutani; Mehmet Bektas; Jeffrey E Lee; Yun Gong; Eric P Tamm; Chintan P Shah; William A Ross; James Yao; Gottumukkala S Raju; Xuemei Wang; Jeffrey H Lee Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2011-10-01 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Lawrence Mj Best; Vishal Rawji; Stephen P Pereira; Brian R Davidson; Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-04-17