Repeat Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration in Patients with Suspected Pancreatic Cancer: Diagnostic Yield and Associated Change in Access to Appropriate Care.
Robert A Mitchell, Dylan Stanger, Constantin Shuster, Jennifer Telford, Eric Lam, Robert Enns
{"title":"Repeat Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration in Patients with Suspected Pancreatic Cancer: Diagnostic Yield and Associated Change in Access to Appropriate Care.","authors":"Robert A Mitchell, Dylan Stanger, Constantin Shuster, Jennifer Telford, Eric Lam, Robert Enns","doi":"10.1155/2016/7678403","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Background. There is a high incidence of inconclusive cytopathology at initial EUS-FNA (endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration) for suspected malignant pancreatic lesions. To obtain appropriate preoperative or palliative chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer, definitive cytopathology is often required. The utility of repeat EUS-FNA is not well established. Methods. A retrospective cohort study was conducted evaluating the yield of repeat EUS-FNA in determining a cytological diagnosis in patients who had undergone a prior EUS-FNA for diagnosis of suspected malignant pancreatic lesions with inconclusive cytopathology. The wait times to the second procedure and to decisions regarding therapy were calculated. Results. Overall, 45 repeat EUS-FNA procedures were performed over seven years for suspected malignant pancreatic lesions. Cytopathological class (I to IV) changed between first and second EUS-FNA in 32 patients (71%). Of 34 patients with an initially nonconclusive diagnosis, 20 had a conclusive diagnosis (59%) on repeat EUS-FNA. The cumulative yield after repeat EUS-FNA for definite pancreatic adenocarcinoma was 7 (16%). The median time interval between first and second EUS-FNA was 31 (7-175) days. Conclusions. A substantial number of patients had a definitive diagnosis of adenocarcinoma on repeat FNA and were, therefore, subsequently able to access appropriate care. </p>","PeriodicalId":81438,"journal":{"name":"Historical studies in the physical and biological sciences : HSPS","volume":"30 1","pages":"7678403"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2016/7678403","citationCount":"19","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Historical studies in the physical and biological sciences : HSPS","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/7678403","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2016/8/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19
Abstract
Background. There is a high incidence of inconclusive cytopathology at initial EUS-FNA (endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration) for suspected malignant pancreatic lesions. To obtain appropriate preoperative or palliative chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer, definitive cytopathology is often required. The utility of repeat EUS-FNA is not well established. Methods. A retrospective cohort study was conducted evaluating the yield of repeat EUS-FNA in determining a cytological diagnosis in patients who had undergone a prior EUS-FNA for diagnosis of suspected malignant pancreatic lesions with inconclusive cytopathology. The wait times to the second procedure and to decisions regarding therapy were calculated. Results. Overall, 45 repeat EUS-FNA procedures were performed over seven years for suspected malignant pancreatic lesions. Cytopathological class (I to IV) changed between first and second EUS-FNA in 32 patients (71%). Of 34 patients with an initially nonconclusive diagnosis, 20 had a conclusive diagnosis (59%) on repeat EUS-FNA. The cumulative yield after repeat EUS-FNA for definite pancreatic adenocarcinoma was 7 (16%). The median time interval between first and second EUS-FNA was 31 (7-175) days. Conclusions. A substantial number of patients had a definitive diagnosis of adenocarcinoma on repeat FNA and were, therefore, subsequently able to access appropriate care.