BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Diagnosis of pancreatic lesions remains a clinical challenge. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in pancreatic mass lesions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical data, laboratory tests, and cytopathological and imaging reports were collected from 185 pancreatic EUS cases performed from March 2010 to January 2014. The final diagnosis was based on surgical findings, EUS-FNA or computed tomography (CT)-guided biopsy. RESULTS: A total of 100 pancreatic FNAs were obtained by EUS. Most positive diagnoses of malignancy were pancreatic adenocarcinomas (n = 61). The site of pancreatic adenocarcinoma was the head in 50 (82.0%), body in seven (11.5%), and tail in four (6.5%). The sensitivity, specifi city, and positive and negative predictive values of EUS-FNA for diagnosing adenocarcinoma were 80.3%, 92.3%, 94.2%, and 75.0%, respectively. DISCUSSION: We concluded that EUS-FNA of pancreatic lesion accurately diagnoses pancreatic adenocarcinoma and should be considered for the standard management of pancreatic adenocarcinoma.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Diagnosis of pancreatic lesions remains a clinical challenge. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in pancreatic mass lesions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical data, laboratory tests, and cytopathological and imaging reports were collected from 185 pancreatic EUS cases performed from March 2010 to January 2014. The final diagnosis was based on surgical findings, EUS-FNA or computed tomography (CT)-guided biopsy. RESULTS: A total of 100 pancreatic FNAs were obtained by EUS. Most positive diagnoses of malignancy were pancreatic adenocarcinomas (n = 61). The site of pancreatic adenocarcinoma was the head in 50 (82.0%), body in seven (11.5%), and tail in four (6.5%). The sensitivity, specifi city, and positive and negative predictive values of EUS-FNA for diagnosing adenocarcinoma were 80.3%, 92.3%, 94.2%, and 75.0%, respectively. DISCUSSION: We concluded that EUS-FNA of pancreatic lesion accurately diagnoses pancreatic adenocarcinoma and should be considered for the standard management of pancreatic adenocarcinoma.
Authors: Sukru Mehmet Erturk; Koenraad J Mortelé; Kemal Tuncali; John R Saltzman; Roger Lao; Stuart G Silverman Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Miquel Porta; Xavier Fabregat; Núria Malats; Luisa Guarner; Alfredo Carrato; Ana de Miguel; Laura Ruiz; Manuel Jariod; Sergi Costafreda; Susana Coll; Juan Alguacil; Josep M Corominas; Ricard Solà; Antonio Salas; Francisco X Real Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: P L Baron; L E Aabakken; D J Cole; M B LeVeen; L F Baron; D M Daniel; J T Cunningham; R H Hawes; D B Adams; B J Hoffman Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 1997-12 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Chandrajit P Raut; Ana M Grau; Gregg A Staerkel; Madhukar Kaw; Eric P Tamm; Robert A Wolff; Jean-Nicolas Vauthey; Jeffrey E Lee; Peter W T Pisters; Douglas B Evans Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Yung Ka Chin; Julio Iglesias-Garcia; Daniel de la Iglesia; Jose Lariño-Noia; Ihab Abdulkader-Nallib; Hector Lázare; Susana Rebolledo Olmedo; J Enrique Dominguez-Muñoz Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2017-08-21 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Esther Llop; Pedro E Guerrero; Adrià Duran; Sílvia Barrabés; Anna Massaguer; María José Ferri; Maite Albiol-Quer; Rafael de Llorens; Rosa Peracaula Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2018-06-28 Impact factor: 5.742