首页> 外文期刊>Digestive Diseases and Sciences >Comparison of the outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound based on community hospital versus tertiary academic center settings
【24h】

Comparison of the outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound based on community hospital versus tertiary academic center settings

机译:基于社区医院和三级学术中心设置的内镜超声结果比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objective: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is an established tool in the management of gastrointestinal diseases. The majority of EUS procedures are performed in tertiary care hospitals but the technology has also disseminated to community hospitals. The data from community hospitals are limited and there are no published studies comparing EUS-fine needle aspiration (FNA) outcomes in community versus tertiary settings. Our objective is to compare EUS procedures performed in these two separate settings. Methods: EUS procedures performed for pancreatobiliary indications in an academic tertiary care hospital and a community hospital were retrospectively reviewed and compared. The patient demographics, procedure time, procedure indications, FNA performed, pass counts, needle size, rapid onsite evaluation (ROSE) and final cytological diagnosis were compared between the two centers. Cytological diagnosis was categorized as satisfactory and unsatisfactory samples. Results: There was no significant difference in patient age, gender, indications, procedure time, FNA performed, needle size, or pass counts between the tertiary hospital (n = 361) and community hospital (n = 119). ROSE was a significant determinant factor for adequacy of sample. There was a positive linear relationship between adequacy of the sample and number of pass counts. After performing a logistic regression and adjusting for target site, the overall odds of having an unsatisfactory specimen were not significantly different at the two centers (OR 0.51, CI 0.23-1.17, p = 0.11). Percentages of unsatisfactory samples were not significantly different at the two centers for solid lesions (7.4 vs. 3.1 %, p = 0.33), cysts (33.3 vs. 23.8 %, p = 0.31,) or lymph nodes (25.0 vs. 0 %, p = 0.063). Conclusion: Cytological yield of EUS-FNA in a community hospital is similar to that of a tertiary hospital. Community hospitals can provide EUS services with reasonable success.
机译:目的:内镜超声检查(EUS)是治疗胃肠道疾病的既定工具。 EUS的大多数程序是在三级医院进行的,但该技术也已传播到社区医院。社区医院的数据有限,尚无已发表的研究比较社区和三级环境中的EUS细针抽吸(FNA)结果。我们的目标是比较在这两个单独设置中执行的EUS程序。方法:回顾性审查和比较在三级学术医院和社区医院对胰胆管适应症进行的EUS程序。在两个中心之间比较了患者的人口统计学,手术时间,手术指征,进行的FNA,通过计数,针头大小,快速现场评估(ROSE)和最终的细胞学诊断。细胞学诊断被分类为满意和不满意的样本。结果:三级医院(n = 361)和社区医院(n = 119)之间的患者年龄,性别,适应症,手术时间,进行FNA,针头大小或通过计数没有显着差异。 ROSE是样品是否充足的重要决定因素。样品的充分性与通过次数之间存在正线性关系。进行逻辑回归并调整目标部位后,两个中心的样本不合格的总体几率没有显着差异(OR 0.51,CI 0.23-1.17,p = 0.11)。在两个中心,实体病变(7.4 vs. 3.1%,p = 0.33),囊肿(33.3 vs. 23.8%,p = 0.31)或淋巴结(25.0 vs. 0%)的不满意样品百分比没有显着差异。 p = 0.063)。结论:社区医院EUS-FNA的细胞学产量与三级医院相似。社区医院可以提供合理的成功EUS服务。

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