BACKGROUND: Data on the utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided Trucut biopsy (EUS-TCB) for suspected gastrointestinal mesenchymal tumor (GIMT) are limited. This study aimed to determine the diagnostic yield and complications from EUS-TCB for GIMT. METHODS: Consecutive patients with suspected upper gastrointestinal or rectal GIMT from the muscularis propria with a maximal diameter of 20 mm or more were enrolled in a prospective, single-center cohort. An EUS-TCB was performed when on-site fine-needle aspiration (FNA) cytology review of the lesion was deemed suboptimal. Gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) and leiomyoma were defined by the presence or absence of positive immunochemistry (IC) for c-kit, respectively. All GIMTs with a nondiagnostic IC were considered as unspecified. The outcomes assessed included diagnostic pathologic and IC yield (when tested) and procedural complications. RESULTS: In this study, 38 patients (24 women; median age, 62 years) with suspected GIMT (median maximal diameter, 42 mm; range, 20-120 mm) in the esophagus (n=6), stomach (n=28), duodenum (n=3), or rectum (n=1) underwent EUS-TCB without complications. Final diagnoses included GIST for 20 patients, leiomyoma for 13 patients, unspecified GIMT for 3 patients, and unknown disorder for 2 patients. An EUS-FNA was performed for 33 (87%) of the 38 patients, a diagnostic final cytology for 25 (76%) of 33 patients, and an FNA-IC for 12 (50%) of 24 patients. The EUS-TCB (median, 3 passes; range, 1-8 passes) obtained a visible tissue specimen in 37 (97%) of the 38 patients, with a median overall maximal fragment length of 3.5 mm (range, 0-15 mm). The diagnostic final TCB histology and TCB-IC were obtained, respectively, in 79 and 97% of the samples tested. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, EUS-TCB provided diagnostic histology and IC for 79 and 97% of the patients, respectively. For the initial biopsy of GIMT, EUS-TCB may be considered an acceptable alternative to EUS-FNA.
BACKGROUND: Data on the utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided Trucut biopsy (EUS-TCB) for suspected gastrointestinal mesenchymal tumor (GIMT) are limited. This study aimed to determine the diagnostic yield and complications from EUS-TCB for GIMT. METHODS: Consecutive patients with suspected upper gastrointestinal or rectal GIMT from the muscularis propria with a maximal diameter of 20 mm or more were enrolled in a prospective, single-center cohort. An EUS-TCB was performed when on-site fine-needle aspiration (FNA) cytology review of the lesion was deemed suboptimal. Gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) and leiomyoma were defined by the presence or absence of positive immunochemistry (IC) for c-kit, respectively. All GIMTs with a nondiagnostic IC were considered as unspecified. The outcomes assessed included diagnostic pathologic and IC yield (when tested) and procedural complications. RESULTS: In this study, 38 patients (24 women; median age, 62 years) with suspected GIMT (median maximal diameter, 42 mm; range, 20-120 mm) in the esophagus (n=6), stomach (n=28), duodenum (n=3), or rectum (n=1) underwent EUS-TCB without complications. Final diagnoses included GIST for 20 patients, leiomyoma for 13 patients, unspecified GIMT for 3 patients, and unknown disorder for 2 patients. An EUS-FNA was performed for 33 (87%) of the 38 patients, a diagnostic final cytology for 25 (76%) of 33 patients, and an FNA-IC for 12 (50%) of 24 patients. The EUS-TCB (median, 3 passes; range, 1-8 passes) obtained a visible tissue specimen in 37 (97%) of the 38 patients, with a median overall maximal fragment length of 3.5 mm (range, 0-15 mm). The diagnostic final TCB histology and TCB-IC were obtained, respectively, in 79 and 97% of the samples tested. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, EUS-TCB provided diagnostic histology and IC for 79 and 97% of the patients, respectively. For the initial biopsy of GIMT, EUS-TCB may be considered an acceptable alternative to EUS-FNA.
Authors: Benjamin R Kipp; Telma C Pereira; Paola C Souza; Ferga C Gleeson; Michael J Levy; Amy C Clayton Journal: Diagn Cytopathol Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 1.582
Authors: G P Aithal; G K Anagnostopoulos; W Tam; J Dean; A Zaitoun; G Kocjan; K Ragunath; S P Pereira Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2007-07-10 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: Evelyne Bareck; Ahmed Ba-Ssalamah; Thomas Brodowicz; Wolfgang Eisterer; Michael Häfner; Christoph Högenauer; Ulrike Kastner; Thomas Kühr; Friedrich Längle; Bernadette Liegl-Atzwanger; Sebastian F Schoppmann; Gerlig Widmann; Fritz Wrba; Johannes Zacherl; Ferdinand Ploner Journal: Wien Med Wochenschr Date: 2013-03-19
Authors: Mi Na Kim; Seung Joo Kang; Sang Gyun Kim; Jong Pil Im; Joo Sung Kim; Hyun Chae Jung; In Sung Song Journal: Gut Liver Date: 2013-08-14 Impact factor: 4.519
Authors: Chang-Min Cho; Mohammad Al-Haddad; Julia K Leblanc; Stuart Sherman; Lee McHenry; John Dewitt Journal: Gut Liver Date: 2013-02-07 Impact factor: 4.519
Authors: John DeWitt; Chang-Min Cho; Jingmei Lin; Mohammad Al-Haddad; Marcia Irene Canto; Ashley Salamone; Ralph H Hruban; Ahmed A Messallam; Mouen A Khashab Journal: Endosc Int Open Date: 2015-06-24