Literature DB >> 21688127

Relationship of pancreatic mass size and diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration.

Ali A Siddiqui1, Lauren J Brown, Shih-Kuang S Hong, Rossitza A Draganova-Tacheva, Jason Korenblit, David E Loren, Thomas E Kowalski, Charalambos Solomides.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is central to discerning the diagnosis of solid pancreatic tumors through tissue acquisition. Test performance is affected by a number of factors including location of mass within the pancreas, presence of onsite cytology technologist, and number of passes with the needle. The influence of tumor size has not been well studied. AIM: The objective of the current study was to determine whether the size of mass affects the diagnostic accuracy for solid pancreatic lesions aspirated under EUS guidance.
METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively on all patients with solid pancreatic masses undergoing EUS-FNA from June 2003 to August 2010. The cytology samples were reported as positive, suspicious for malignancy, atypical, negative, or nondiagnostic. The gold standard for a cytological diagnosis was histological confirmation or clinical follow-up of more than 6 months with repeat imaging. Patients were divided into five groups based upon lesion size as follows: (a) less than 1 cm, (b) 1-2 cm, (c) 2-3 cm, (d) 3-4 cm, and (e) greater than 4 cm. Performance characteristics of EUS-FNA including sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were compared for each group. Accuracy was defined as the ratio of the sum of true-positive and true-negative values divided by the number of lesions.
RESULTS: We identified 583 patients with solid pancreatic lesions in which EUS-FNA was performed and adequate cellularity was obtained (47% men, mean age 65 ± 1.4 (SE) years). Overall, 486 (83%) of lesions were pancreatic adenocarcinoma, 18 (3%) were neuroendocrine tumors, 12 (2%) were lymphomas, and 67 (12%) were benign lesions. The median size of the mass was 3 cm (range, 0.5-7 cm). A mean of 4.9 passes (range, 1-9 passes) was needed to obtain adequate samples from lesions. The overall yield of obtaining adequate samples for diagnosis was 85%. When stratified by size, the EUS-FNA sensitivity for lesions with size <1, 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, and >4 cm was 40, 75.9, 86.9, 93.2, and 91.6%, respectively; EUS-FNA sensitivity strongly correlate with tumor size (p < 0.001). Similarly, the accuracy of EUS-FNA increased as lesion size increased, ranging from 47% for tumors less than 1 cm to 88% for tumors greater than 4 cm (p < 0.05). Location of tumor and number of needle passes did not significantly influence EUS-FNA performance characteristics.
CONCLUSIONS: The sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA for solid pancreatic lesions is strongly correlated with tumor size. Sensitivity and accuracy decrease significantly for tumors that are smaller than 1 cm.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21688127     DOI: 10.1007/s10620-011-1782-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dig Dis Sci        ISSN: 0163-2116            Impact factor:   3.199


  24 in total

1.  A multicenter U.S. experience with EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration using the Olympus GF-UM30P echoendoscope: safety and effectiveness.

Authors:  A V Sahai; D Schembre; P D Stevens; A Chak; G Isenberg; C J Lightdale; M V Sivak; R H Hawes
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  1999-12       Impact factor: 9.427

2.  Factors predicting the number of EUS-guided fine-needle passes for diagnosis of pancreatic malignancies.

Authors:  R A Erickson; L Sayage-Rabie; R S Beissner
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 9.427

3.  Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy: a powerful tool to obtain samples from small lesions.

Authors:  Nirag C Jhala; Darshana Jhala; Isam Eltoum; Selwyn M Vickers; C Mel Wilcox; David C Chhieng; Mohamad A Eloubeidi
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2004-08-25       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  Endoscopic ultrasound-guided real-time fine-needle aspiration biopsy of the pancreas in cancer patients with pancreatic lesions.

Authors:  D O Faigel; G G Ginsberg; J S Bentz; P K Gupta; D B Smith; M L Kochman
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy of suspected pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  F Gress; K Gottlieb; S Sherman; G Lehman
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2001-03-20       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  Cancer statistics, 2010.

Authors:  Ahmedin Jemal; Rebecca Siegel; Jiaquan Xu; Elizabeth Ward
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2010-07-07       Impact factor: 508.702

7.  Fine-needle aspiration biopsy of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: loss of diagnostic accuracy with small tumors.

Authors:  R A Graham; M Bankoff; R Hediger; H Z Shaker; R B Reinhold
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 3.454

8.  Characterization of monoclonal antibody PAM4 reactive with a pancreatic cancer mucin.

Authors:  D V Gold; K Lew; R Maliniak; M Hernandez; T Cardillo
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  1994-04-15       Impact factor: 7.396

9.  Pancreatic tumors: evaluation with endoscopic US, CT, and MR imaging.

Authors:  M F Müller; C Meyenberger; P Bertschinger; R Schaer; B Marincek
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Comparison of endoscopic ultrasonography and multidetector computed tomography for detecting and staging pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  John DeWitt; Benedict Devereaux; Melissa Chriswell; Kathleen McGreevy; Thomas Howard; Thomas F Imperiale; Donato Ciaccia; Kathleen A Lane; Dean Maglinte; Kenyon Kopecky; Julia LeBlanc; Lee McHenry; James Madura; Alex Aisen; Harvey Cramer; Oscar Cummings; Stuart Sherman
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2004-11-16       Impact factor: 25.391

View more
  31 in total

1.  Impact of biliary stents on EUS-guided FNA of pancreatic mass lesions.

Authors:  Nathaniel Ranney; Milind Phadnis; Jessica Trevino; Jayapal Ramesh; C Mel Wilcox; Shyam Varadarajulu
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 9.427

Review 2.  Diagnostic evaluation of solid pancreatic masses.

Authors:  Jeffrey L Tokar; Rohit Walia
Journal:  Curr Gastroenterol Rep       Date:  2013-10

Review 3.  Role of endoscopic ultrasound in the molecular diagnosis of pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Barbara Bournet; Marion Gayral; Jérôme Torrisani; Janick Selves; Pierre Cordelier; Louis Buscail
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-08-21       Impact factor: 5.742

4.  Rapid on-site evaluation reduces needle passes in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for solid pancreatic lesions: a risk-benefit analysis.

Authors:  Robert L Schmidt; Brandon S Walker; Kirsten Howard; Lester J Layfield; Douglas G Adler
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2013-07-04       Impact factor: 3.199

5.  Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for suspected malignancies adjacent to the gastrointestinal tract.

Authors:  Pietro Gambitta; Antonio Armellino; Edoardo Forti; Maurizio Vertemati; Paola Enrica Colombo; Paolo Aseni
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-07-14       Impact factor: 5.742

6.  The Final Cytopathologic Diagnosis of Initially "Indeterminate" Pancreatic Mass Lesions.

Authors:  Nigeen H Janisch; Stuart R Gordon; Timothy B Gardner
Journal:  Pancreas       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 3.327

7.  Imaging of pancreatic cancer: An overview.

Authors:  Pavan Tummala; Omer Junaidi; Banke Agarwal
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2011-09

8.  Slow pull versus suction in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid masses.

Authors:  Yousuke Nakai; Hiroyuki Isayama; Kenneth J Chang; Natsuyo Yamamoto; Tsuyoshi Hamada; Rie Uchino; Suguru Mizuno; Koji Miyabayashi; Keisuke Yamamoto; Kazumichi Kawakubo; Hirofumi Kogure; Takashi Sasaki; Kenji Hirano; Mariko Tanaka; Minoru Tada; Masashi Fukayama; Kazuhiko Koike
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-01-16       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 9.  Endoscopic ultrasonography guided-fine needle aspiration for the diagnosis of solid pancreaticobiliary lesions: Clinical aspects to improve the diagnosis.

Authors:  Hiroyuki Matsubayashi; Toru Matsui; Yohei Yabuuchi; Kenichiro Imai; Masaki Tanaka; Naomi Kakushima; Keiko Sasaki; Hiroyuki Ono
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-01-14       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  Unexpected benign histopathology after pancreatoduodenectomy for presumed malignancy: accepting the inevitable.

Authors:  Rachel M Gomes; Munita Bal; Shraddha Patkar; Mahesh Goel; Shailesh V Shrikhande
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2016-01-26       Impact factor: 3.445

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.