Chen Du1, Ningli Chai1, Enqiang Linghu2, Huikai Li1, Xiuxue Feng1, Xiangdong Wang1, Ping Tang1. 1. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Haidian District, No. 28 of Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China. 2. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Haidian District, No. 28 of Fuxing Road, Beijing, 100853, China. linghuenqiang@vip.sina.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: No study has evaluated the diagnostic value of SpyGlass by comparing SpyGlass results and non-SpyGlass results. In this retrospective study, we aimed to compare the diagnostic value of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and EUS-FNA combined with SpyGlass to evaluate whether SpyGlass is valuable for increasing the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA. METHODS: From April 2015 to April 2020, 251 patients suspected of having pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) by imaging techniques who then underwent EUS-FNA were retrospectively enrolled. Only 98 patients who underwent surgical resection with a pathological diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesion (PCL) were studied. The diagnostic performance outcomes were compared between the EUS-FNA group (EUS-FNA alone, n = 40) and the SpyGlass group (EUS-FNA combined with SpyGlass, n = 58) to assess the value of SpyGlass in diagnosing PCLs. RESULTS: There were 71 females and 27 males with an overall mean age of 47.6 years. The median diameter of the PCLs was 42.2 mm (range, 11.4-100.0 mm). Approximately 37 cysts were localized in the head/neck of the pancreas, while 61 in the body/tail. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy of the EUS-FNA group were 96.4% (27/28), 83.3% (10/12), 93.1% (27/29), 90.9% (10/11) and 92.5% (37/40), while those in the SpyGlass group were 100% (54/54), 75% (3/4), 98.2% (54/55), 100% (3/3) and 98.3% (57/58), respectively. The diagnostic accuracy rate in the SpyGlass group was higher than that in the EUS-FNA group; however, no significant difference was found between the two groups (P = 0.368). The diagnostic accuracy of evaluating specific cyst types in the EUS-FNA group was 85% (34/40), similar to that in the SpyGlass group (85.0% vs 84.5%, P = 0.944). CONCLUSION: SpyGlass seems less valuable for the diagnosis of PCLs when EUS and EUS-FNA have been performed by experienced endoscopists.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: No study has evaluated the diagnostic value of SpyGlass by comparing SpyGlass results and non-SpyGlass results. In this retrospective study, we aimed to compare the diagnostic value of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and EUS-FNA combined with SpyGlass to evaluate whether SpyGlass is valuable for increasing the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA. METHODS: From April 2015 to April 2020, 251 patients suspected of having pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) by imaging techniques who then underwent EUS-FNA were retrospectively enrolled. Only 98 patients who underwent surgical resection with a pathological diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesion (PCL) were studied. The diagnostic performance outcomes were compared between the EUS-FNA group (EUS-FNA alone, n = 40) and the SpyGlass group (EUS-FNA combined with SpyGlass, n = 58) to assess the value of SpyGlass in diagnosing PCLs. RESULTS: There were 71 females and 27 males with an overall mean age of 47.6 years. The median diameter of the PCLs was 42.2 mm (range, 11.4-100.0 mm). Approximately 37 cysts were localized in the head/neck of the pancreas, while 61 in the body/tail. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic accuracy of the EUS-FNA group were 96.4% (27/28), 83.3% (10/12), 93.1% (27/29), 90.9% (10/11) and 92.5% (37/40), while those in the SpyGlass group were 100% (54/54), 75% (3/4), 98.2% (54/55), 100% (3/3) and 98.3% (57/58), respectively. The diagnostic accuracy rate in the SpyGlass group was higher than that in the EUS-FNA group; however, no significant difference was found between the two groups (P = 0.368). The diagnostic accuracy of evaluating specific cyst types in the EUS-FNA group was 85% (34/40), similar to that in the SpyGlass group (85.0% vs 84.5%, P = 0.944). CONCLUSION: SpyGlass seems less valuable for the diagnosis of PCLs when EUS and EUS-FNA have been performed by experienced endoscopists.
Authors: Omer Basar; Osman Yuksel; Dennis J Yang; Jason Samarasena; David Forcione; Christopher J DiMaio; Mihir S Wagh; Kenneth Chang; Brenna Casey; Carlos Fernandez-Del Castillo; Martha B Pitman; William R Brugge Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2018-03-03 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Hussein Hassan Okasha; Mahmoud Ashry; Hala M K Imam; Reem Ezzat; Mohamed Naguib; Ali H Farag; Emad H Gemeie; Hani M Khattab Journal: Endosc Ultrasound Date: 2015 Apr-Jun Impact factor: 5.628
Authors: Anthony Yuen-Bun Teoh; Dong Wan Seo; William Brugge; John Dewitt; Pradermchai Kongkam; Enqiang Linghu; Matthew T Moyer; Ji Kon Ryu; Khek Yu Ho Journal: Endosc Int Open Date: 2019-08-29