AIM: To compare the usefulness of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNAB) without cytology and mucosal cutting biopsy (MCB) in the histological diagnosis of gastric submucosal tumor (SMT). METHODS: We prospectively compared the diagnostic yield, feasibility, and safety of EUS-FNAB and those of MCB based on endoscopic submucosal dissection. The cases of 20 consecutive patients with gastric SMT ≥ 1 cm in diameter. who underwent both EUS-FNAB and MCB were investigated. RESULTS: The histological diagnoses were gastrointestinal stromal tumors (n = 7), leiomyoma (n = 6), schwannoma (n = 2), aberrant pancreas (n = 2), and one case each of glomus tumor, metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma, and no-diagnosis. The tumors' mean size was 23.6 mm. Histological diagnosis was made in 65.0% of the EUS-FNABs and 60.0% of the MCBs, a nonsignificant difference. There were no significant differences in the diagnostic yield concerning the tumor location or tumor size between the two methods. However, diagnostic specimens were significantly more frequently obtained in lesions with intraluminal growth than in those with extraluminal growth by the MCB method (P = 0.01). All four SMTs with extraluminal growth were diagnosed only by EUS-FNAB (P = 0.03). No complications were found in either method. CONCLUSION: MCB may be chosen as an alternative diagnostic modality in tumors showing the intraluminal growth pattern regardless of tumor size, whereas EUS-FNAB should be performed for SMTs with extraluminal growth.
AIM: To compare the usefulness of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNAB) without cytology and mucosal cutting biopsy (MCB) in the histological diagnosis of gastric submucosal tumor (SMT). METHODS: We prospectively compared the diagnostic yield, feasibility, and safety of EUS-FNAB and those of MCB based on endoscopic submucosal dissection. The cases of 20 consecutive patients with gastric SMT ≥ 1 cm in diameter. who underwent both EUS-FNAB and MCB were investigated. RESULTS: The histological diagnoses were gastrointestinal stromal tumors (n = 7), leiomyoma (n = 6), schwannoma (n = 2), aberrant pancreas (n = 2), and one case each of glomus tumor, metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma, and no-diagnosis. The tumors' mean size was 23.6 mm. Histological diagnosis was made in 65.0% of the EUS-FNABs and 60.0% of the MCBs, a nonsignificant difference. There were no significant differences in the diagnostic yield concerning the tumor location or tumor size between the two methods. However, diagnostic specimens were significantly more frequently obtained in lesions with intraluminal growth than in those with extraluminal growth by the MCB method (P = 0.01). All four SMTs with extraluminal growth were diagnosed only by EUS-FNAB (P = 0.03). No complications were found in either method. CONCLUSION:MCB may be chosen as an alternative diagnostic modality in tumors showing the intraluminal growth pattern regardless of tumor size, whereas EUS-FNAB should be performed for SMTs with extraluminal growth.
Authors: Hang Lak Lee; Oh Wan Kwon; Kang Nyeong Lee; Dae Won Jun; Chang Soo Eun; Oh Young Lee; Yong Chul Jeon; Dong Soo Han; Byung Chul Yoon; Ho Soon Choi; Joon Soo Hahm; Seung Sam Paik Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2011-07-18 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: J A Crosby; C N Catton; A Davis; J Couture; B O'Sullivan; R Kandel; C J Swallow Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2001 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 5.344