Literature DB >> 19262518

Efficacy, safety, and predictive factors for a positive yield of EUS-guided Trucut biopsy: a large tertiary referral center experience.

Titus Thomas1, Phillip V Kaye, Krish Ragunath, Guruprasad Aithal.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided trucut biopsy (EUS-TCB) technique has the advantage of obtaining tissue for histological examination rather than for cytology alone. However, the diagnostic yield may depend on factors related to both technical aspects and the lesions sampled. Safety of EUS-TCB is yet to be established in a large number of procedures. The aim of the study was to determine factors predicting a positive diagnostic yield, and safety for EUS-TCB in a large tertiary referral center-based service.
METHODS: All patients were referred for EUS-guided tissue sampling as a part of their diagnostic workup. Linear-array echoendoscope (GF-2000-OL5, KeyMed) with a 19-gauge trucut needle (Quick-Core, Wilson-Cook) was used by two operators to obtain tissue samples. Clinical data, details of the EUS-TCB, post-procedure complications, and histology were prospectively collected between May 2002 and February 2008.
RESULTS: In total, 247 patients (143 men) aged 57-73 (median 66) had EUS-TCB performed. Lesions sampled were in the pancreas (113), esophagogastric wall (34), and extra-pancreatic areas (100) (lymph nodes: 52). The maximum diameter of the lesion/wall thickness ranged from 0.6 to 5.4 cm (median 3). One to five passes were made (median 3) to obtain tissue cores 2-18 mm (median 10) in length. The procedure failed in 6% of cases. The overall diagnostic accuracy was 75%. The overall complication rate was 2% (bronchopneumonia, minor hemoptysis, minor hematemesis, mucosal tear, retropharyngeal abscess) with no procedure-related deaths. Site of lesion (pancreatic vs. extra-pancreatic, P<0.032), site of biopsy (stomach vs. duodenum vs. esophagus, P<0.001), and number of passes (< or =2 vs.>2, P<0.013) were predictors of a positive diagnostic yield in univariate analysis. However, only the site of biopsy (P<0.001, 95% CI: 0.58-2.32) and number of passes (P=0.05) were independent predictors in multinominal logistic regression.
CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic yield of EUS-TCB is higher when lesion is approached through the stomach and better when more than two passes were made. In this large series, the complication rate of 2% associated with EUS-TCB was similar to that reported with EUS-fine needle aspiration technique.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19262518     DOI: 10.1038/ajg.2008.97

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0002-9270            Impact factor:   10.864


  42 in total

1.  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

2.  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

3.  Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration: Technique and applications in clinical practice.

Authors:  Benjamin Tharian; Fotios Tsiopoulos; Nayana George; Salvatore Di Pietro; Fabia Attili; Alberto Larghi
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2012-12-16

4.  Rapid on-site evaluation of endoscopic ultrasound core biopsy specimens has excellent specificity and positive predictive value for gastrointestinal lesions.

Authors:  Kumar Krishnan; Sharvari Dalal; Ritu Nayar; Rajesh N Keswani; Laurie Keefer; Srinadh Komanduri
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2013-03-17       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 5.  Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle tissue acquisition: where we stand in 2013?

Authors:  Zeid Karadsheh; Mohammad Al-Haddad
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-03-07       Impact factor: 5.742

6.  Tissue diagnosis of GI subepithelial tumor only through Trucut biopsy under a forward-viewing endoscope: applicability as newer diagnostic modality.

Authors:  Weon Jin Ko; Ga Won Song; Ki Baik Hahm; Sung Pyo Hong; Joo Young Cho; Jun-Hyung Cho; So Young Jin
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-05-18       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 7.  Diagnostic endoscopic ultrasonography: assessment of safety and prevention of complications.

Authors:  Christian Jenssen; Maria Victoria Alvarez-Sánchez; Bertrand Napoléon; Siegbert Faiss
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-09-14       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 8.  Primary pancreatic lymphoma: what we need to know.

Authors:  Neda Rad; Alireza Khafaf; Amir Houshang Mohammad Alizadeh
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2017-08

9.  Can the wet suction technique change the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for diagnosing autoimmune pancreatitis type 1? A prospective single-arm study.

Authors:  Mitsuru Sugimoto; Tadayuki Takagi; Rei Suzuki; Naoki Konno; Hiroyuki Asama; Yuki Sato; Hiroki Irie; Ko Watanabe; Jun Nakamura; Hitomi Kikuchi; Mika Takasumi; Minami Hashimoto; Tsunetaka Kato; Takuto Hikichi; Kenji Notohara; Hiromasa Ohira
Journal:  World J Clin Cases       Date:  2020-01-06       Impact factor: 1.337

10.  Optimizing Diagnostic Yield for EUS-Guided Sampling of Solid Pancreatic Lesions: A Technical Review.

Authors:  Brian R Weston; Manoop S Bhutani
Journal:  Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y)       Date:  2013-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.