...
首页> 外文期刊>Endoscopy International Open >A randomized controlled cross-over trial and cost analysis comparing endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration and fine needle biopsy
【24h】

A randomized controlled cross-over trial and cost analysis comparing endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration and fine needle biopsy

机译:比较内镜超声细针穿刺和细针活检的随机对照试验和成本分析

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background and study aims: Techniques to optimize endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) in a variety of lesion types have not yet been established. The primary aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic yield (DY) of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) to endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) for pancreatic and non-pancreatic masses. Patients and methods: Consecutive patients referred for EUS-TA underwent randomization to EUS-FNA or EUS-FNB at four tertiary-care medical centers. A maximum of three passes were allowed for the initial method of EUS-TA and patients were crossed over to the other arm based on on-site specimen adequacy. Results: A total of 140 patients were enrolled. The overall DY was significantly higher with specimens obtained by EUS-FNB compared to EUS-FNA (90.0?% vs. 67.1?%, P?=?0.002). While there was no difference in the DY between the two groups for pancreatic masses (FNB: 91.7?% vs. FNA: 78.4?%, P?=?0.19), the DY of EUS-FNB was higher than the EUS-FNA for non-pancreatic lesions (88.2?% vs. 54.5?%, P?=?0.006). Specimen adequacy was higher for EUS-FNB compared to EUS-FNA for all lesions (P?=?0.006). There was a significant rescue effect of crossover from failed FNA to FNB in 27 out of 28 cases (96.5?%, P?=?0.0003). Decision analysis showed that the strategy of EUS-FNB was cost saving compared to EUS-FNA over a wide range of cost and outcome probabilities. Conclusions: Results of this RCT and decision analysis demonstrate superior DY and specimen adequacy for solid mass lesions sampled by EUS-FNB.
机译:背景和研究目的:尚未建立优化各种病变类型的内窥镜超声引导组织采集(EUS-TA)的技术。这项研究的主要目的是比较内镜超声引导下细针穿刺活检(EUS-FNA)与内镜超声引导下细针穿刺活检(EUS-FNB)对胰腺和非胰腺肿块的诊断率(DY)。患者和方法:转诊为EUS-TA的连续患者在四个三级医疗中心接受随机分配到EUS-FNA或EUS-FNB。 EUS-TA的初始方法最多允许通过3次,并且根据现场样本的充分性将患者转移到另一只手臂。结果:共纳入140例患者。与EUS-FNA相比,通过EUS-FNB获得的标本的总DY显着更高(90.0%vs. 67.1%,P <= 0.002)。两组的DY差异无统计学意义(FNB:91.7%,FNA:78.4%,P≥0.19),但EUS-FNB的DY高于EUS-FNA。非胰腺病变(88.2%对54.5%,P = 0.006)。对于所有病变,EUS-FNB的标本充分性高于EUS-FNA(P = 0.006)。 28例病例中有27例从失败的FNA过渡到FNB具有明显的抢救效果(96.5%,P = 0.0003)。决策分析表明,与EUS-FNA相比,EUS-FNB的策略在各种成本和结果概率上均节省了成本。结论:该RCT和决策分析的结果表明,对于通过EUS-FNB采样的实体块病变,DY和标本充分。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号