Literature DB >> 23826684

Factors affecting the accuracy of endoscopic transpapillary sampling methods for bile duct cancer.

Takao Nishikawa1, Toshio Tsuyuguchi, Yuji Sakai, Harutoshi Sugiyama, Katsunobu Tawada, Rintaro Mikata, Motohisa Tada, Takeshi Ishihara, Masaru Miyazaki, Osamu Yokosuka.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Various methods for endoscopic transpapillary sampling have been developed. However, the factors affecting the accuracy of these methods for bile duct cancer are unknown. The aim of the present study was to determine the factors affecting the accuracy of endoscopic transpapillary sampling methods.
METHODS: We reviewed the results from 101 patients with bile duct cancer who underwent transpapillary sampling by aspiration bile cytology, brushing cytology, and fluoroscopic forceps biopsy. The final diagnosis of bile duct cancer was made on the basis of pathological evaluation of specimens obtained at surgery and the clinical course over at least 1 year in patients not operated on. We carried out subgroup analyses for the factors affecting the accuracy of each transpapillary sampling method.
RESULTS: Aspiration bile cytology was carried out 238 times in 77 patients, brushing cytology was carried out 67 times in 60patients, and fluoroscopic forceps biopsy was carried out 64 times in 53 patients. Accuracies of aspiration bile cytology were significantly higher for longer (≥15 mm) biliary cancerous lesions than for shorter (<15 mm) lesions (30% vs 18%, respectively, P = 0.049). Accuracies of brushing cytology and fluoroscopic forceps biopsy were significantly higher for non-flat than for flat-type biliary cancerous lesions (brushing: 58% vs 38%, respectively, P = 0.032; forceps biopsy: 60% vs 33%, respectively, P = 0.043).
CONCLUSION: Endoscopic transpapillary sampling methods are more accurate for longer or elevated (non-flat) biliary cancerous lesions than for shorter or flat lesions.
© 2013 The Authors. Digestive Endoscopy © 2013 Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  biliary tract; biopsy; cholangiocarcinoma; cytology; endoscopy

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23826684     DOI: 10.1111/den.12140

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dig Endosc        ISSN: 0915-5635            Impact factor:   7.559


  15 in total

1.  Endoscopic sphincterotomy and endoscopic biliary stenting do not affect the sensitivity of transpapillary forceps biopsy for the diagnosis of bile duct adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  Toshinori Aoki; Eizaburo Ohno; Takuya Ishikawa; Yasuyuki Mizutani; Tadashi Iida; Kentaro Yamao; Takeshi Yamamura; Kazuhiro Furukawa; Masanao Nakamura; Takashi Honda; Masatoshi Ishigami; Hiroshi Yatsuya; Hiroki Kawashima
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2022-07-05       Impact factor: 2.847

2.  Adequate tissue acquisition rate of peroral cholangioscopy-guided forceps biopsy.

Authors:  Takumi Onoyama; Yohei Takeda; Soichiro Kawata; Hiroki Kurumi; Hiroki Koda; Taro Yamashita; Wataru Hamamoto; Yuri Sakamoto; Kazuya Matsumoto; Hajime Isomoto
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2020-09

3.  Evaluation of endoscopic transpapillary brushing cytology for the diagnosis of bile duct cancer based on the histopathologic findings.

Authors:  Yu Sasaki; Yoshinobu Okabe; Yusuke Ishida; Tomoki Taira; Makiko Yasumoto; Kei Kuraoka; Yoshiki Naito; Masamichi Nakayama; Osamu Tsuruta; Michio Sata
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-04-20       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 4.  Brush Cytology, Forceps Biopsy, or Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Sampling for Diagnosis of Bile Duct Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Seung Bae Yoon; Sung-Hoon Moon; Sung Woo Ko; Hyun Lim; Ho Suk Kang; Jong Hyeok Kim
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2021-07-14       Impact factor: 3.487

5.  False negative and false positive rates in common bile duct brushing cytology, a single center experience.

Authors:  Bita Geramizadeh; Maryam Moughali; Atefeh Shahim-Aein; Soghra Memari; Ziba Ghetmiri; Alireza Taghavi; Kamran Bagheri Lankarani
Journal:  Gastroenterol Hepatol Bed Bench       Date:  2018

6.  Peroral cholangioscopy-guided forceps biopsy versus fluoroscopy-guided forceps biopsy for extrahepatic biliary lesions.

Authors:  Takumi Onoyama; Wataru Hamamoto; Yuri Sakamoto; Shiho Kawahara; Taro Yamashita; Hiroki Koda; Soichiro Kawata; Yohei Takeda; Kazuya Matsumoto; Hajime Isomoto
Journal:  JGH Open       Date:  2020-08-07

Review 7.  Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography guided interventions in the management of pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Muhammad Nadeem Yousaf; Hamid Ehsan; Ahsan Wahab; Ahmad Muneeb; Fizah S Chaudhary; Richard Williams; Christopher J Haas
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2020-10-16

8.  Outcomes of Different Methods for Analysis of Biliary Brush Cytology and of Factors Associated with Positive Diagnosis in an Age-Dependent Retrospective Review.

Authors:  Mariana Costa; Jorge Canena; Luís Mascarenhas-Lemos; Rafaela Loureiro; Mário Silva; Diana Carvalho; Tiago Capela; Pedro Russo; Gonçalo Ramos; António Mateus-Dias; Mário Ferraz-Oliveira; Pedro Mota Veiga; João Coimbra
Journal:  GE Port J Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-02-28

9.  The Wire-Grasping Method as a New Technique for Forceps Biopsy of Biliary Strictures: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study of Effectiveness.

Authors:  Yasunobu Yamashita; Kazuki Ueda; Yuki Kawaji; Takashi Tamura; Masahiro Itonaga; Takeichi Yoshida; Hiroki Maeda; Hirohito Magari; Takao Maekita; Mikitaka Iguchi; Hideyuki Tamai; Masao Ichinose; Jun Kato
Journal:  Gut Liver       Date:  2016-07-15       Impact factor: 4.519

10.  Transpapillary biliary biopsy for malignant biliary strictures: comparison between cholangiocarcinoma and pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Wei-Ming Chen; Kuo-Liang Wei; Yi-Shing Chen; Pey-Jium Chang; Shui-Yi Tung; Te-Sheng Chang; Hao-Chun Huang; Chein-Heng Shen; Yung-Yu Hsieh; Cheng-Shyong Wu
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2016-05-04       Impact factor: 2.754

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.