...
首页> 外文期刊>Endoscopy International Open >Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration with on-site cytopathology versus core biopsy: a comparison of both techniques performed at the same endoscopic session
【24h】

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration with on-site cytopathology versus core biopsy: a comparison of both techniques performed at the same endoscopic session

机译:内镜超声引导下细针穿刺活检与原位细胞病理学对比核心活检:两种技术在同一次内镜会议上的比较

获取原文
           

摘要

Background: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) with bedside cytopathology is the gold standard for assessment of pancreatic, subepithelial, and other lesions in close proximity to the gastrointestinal tract, but it is time-consuming, has certain diagnostic limitations, and bedside cytopathology is not widely available. Aims: The goal of this study is to compare the diagnostic yield of EUS-guided FNA with on-site cytopathology and EUS-guided core biopsy. Methods: Twenty-six patients with gastrointestinal mass lesions requiring biopsy at a tertiary medical center were included in this retrospective analysis of a prospective cohort. Two core biopsies were taken using a 22 gauge needle followed by FNA guided by a bedside cytopathologist at the same endoscopic session. The diagnostic yield and test characteristics of EUS core biopsy and EUS FNA with bedside cytopathology were examined. Results: The mean number of passes was 3.2 for FNA, and the mean procedure time was 39.4 minutes. The final diagnosis was malignant in 92.3?%. Sensitivity and specificity were 83?% and 100?%, respectively, for FNA, and 91.7?% and 100?%, respectively, for core biopsy. Diagnostic accuracy was 92.3?% for FNA and 84.6?% for core biopsy. The two approaches were in agreement in 88.4?% with a kappa statistic of 0.66 (95?% confidence interval 0.33?–?0.99). Conclusions: An approach using two passes with a core biopsy needle is comparable to the current gold standard of FNA with bedside cytopathology. The performance of two core biopsies is time-efficient and could represent a good alternative to FNA with bedside cytopathology.
机译:背景:内镜超声(EUS)引导的细针穿刺(FNA)结合床旁细胞病理学是评估胃肠道附近胰腺,上皮下和其他病变的金标准,但它很耗时,具有一定的诊断价值局限性,床旁细胞病理学尚不广泛。目的:本研究的目的是将EUS引导的FNA与现场细胞病理学和EUS引导的核心活检的诊断率进行比较。方法:这项对前瞻性队列的回顾性分析纳入了26例需要在第三级医疗中心进行活检的胃肠道肿块病变患者。使用22号针头进行两次核心活检,然后在同一内窥镜检查期间由床旁细胞病理学家指导进行FNA。通过床旁细胞病理学检查了EUS核心活检和EUS FNA的诊断率和测试特征。结果:FNA的平均通过次数为3.2,平均手术时间为39.4分钟。最终诊断为恶性的占92.3%。 FNA的敏感性和特异性分别为83%和100%,核心活检的敏感性和特异性分别为91.7%和100%。 FNA的诊断准确性为92.3%,核心活检的诊断准确性为84.6%。两种方法的一致性为88.4%,kappa统计值为0.66(95%的置信区间为0.33?-0.99)。结论:采用两次穿刺活检针的方法与目前床旁细胞病理学检查的FNA金标准相当。两次核心活检的表现是省时的,可以代表床旁细胞病理学检查替代FNA。

著录项

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