Jeremy Wang, Jihane N Benhammou, Kevin Ghassemi, Stephen Kim, Alireza Sedarat, James Farrell, Joseph R Pisegna
{"title":"超声内镜引导下细针抽吸与计算机断层引导下细针抽吸相比对胰腺神经内分泌小肿瘤的准确诊断。","authors":"Jeremy Wang, Jihane N Benhammou, Kevin Ghassemi, Stephen Kim, Alireza Sedarat, James Farrell, Joseph R Pisegna","doi":"10.15226/2374-815X/4/2/00186","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The role of EUS-guided FNA as a highly sensitive modality in the diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma is well documented. However, there is little published data on the role of EUS-FNA in diagnosing pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs).</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study is to compare the sensitivity of EUS-FNA to that of CT-FNA for diagnosing pancreatic NETs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a single institution retrospective analysis of the operating characteristics of EUS-FNA and CT-FNA in detecting pancreatic NETs. Only patients with a final diagnosis of pancreatic NET were selected for this study. Procedure related data, including tumor size and location, and presence of a cytotechnologist were recorded. The results of each FNA were compared to the final clinico-pathological diagnosis to calculate sensitivity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-eight patients undergoing FNA (19 by EUS, 9 by CT) were analyzed. NETs diagnosed by EUS-FNA were smaller compared with CT-FNA (2.7 ± 0.9cm vs. 6.5 ± 2.1cm, p = 0.009) and were more often found in the pancreatic head (47.4% vs. 11.1%, p = 0.035). There were no significant differences in sensitivity between EUS-FNA and CT-FNA specimens (73.7% vs. 88.9%, p = 0.33).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>EUS-guided FNA is as sensitive as CT-guided FNA in diagnosing pancreatic NETs, but its main advantage is in the diagnosis of smaller pancreatic NETs in the head of the pancreas. It may also be the preferred approach in the diagnosis of multifocal pancreatic NETs in the setting of MEN I Syndrome.</p>","PeriodicalId":90898,"journal":{"name":"Journal of gastroenterology, pancreatology & liver disorders","volume":"4 2","pages":"1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5837075/pdf/nihms895252.pdf","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration Accurately Diagnoses Smaller Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors Compared To Computer Tomography-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration.\",\"authors\":\"Jeremy Wang, Jihane N Benhammou, Kevin Ghassemi, Stephen Kim, Alireza Sedarat, James Farrell, Joseph R Pisegna\",\"doi\":\"10.15226/2374-815X/4/2/00186\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The role of EUS-guided FNA as a highly sensitive modality in the diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma is well documented. However, there is little published data on the role of EUS-FNA in diagnosing pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs).</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study is to compare the sensitivity of EUS-FNA to that of CT-FNA for diagnosing pancreatic NETs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a single institution retrospective analysis of the operating characteristics of EUS-FNA and CT-FNA in detecting pancreatic NETs. Only patients with a final diagnosis of pancreatic NET were selected for this study. Procedure related data, including tumor size and location, and presence of a cytotechnologist were recorded. The results of each FNA were compared to the final clinico-pathological diagnosis to calculate sensitivity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-eight patients undergoing FNA (19 by EUS, 9 by CT) were analyzed. NETs diagnosed by EUS-FNA were smaller compared with CT-FNA (2.7 ± 0.9cm vs. 6.5 ± 2.1cm, p = 0.009) and were more often found in the pancreatic head (47.4% vs. 11.1%, p = 0.035). There were no significant differences in sensitivity between EUS-FNA and CT-FNA specimens (73.7% vs. 88.9%, p = 0.33).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>EUS-guided FNA is as sensitive as CT-guided FNA in diagnosing pancreatic NETs, but its main advantage is in the diagnosis of smaller pancreatic NETs in the head of the pancreas. It may also be the preferred approach in the diagnosis of multifocal pancreatic NETs in the setting of MEN I Syndrome.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":90898,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of gastroenterology, pancreatology & liver disorders\",\"volume\":\"4 2\",\"pages\":\"1-7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5837075/pdf/nihms895252.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of gastroenterology, pancreatology & liver disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15226/2374-815X/4/2/00186\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2017/3/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of gastroenterology, pancreatology & liver disorders","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15226/2374-815X/4/2/00186","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/3/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
摘要
导读:eus引导下的FNA作为一种高度敏感的诊断胰腺腺癌的方式,其作用是有充分证据的。然而,关于EUS-FNA在诊断胰腺神经内分泌肿瘤(NETs)中的作用的公开数据很少。目的:比较EUS-FNA与CT-FNA诊断胰腺NETs的敏感性。方法:单机构回顾性分析EUS-FNA和CT-FNA检测胰腺NETs的工作特点。本研究仅选择最终诊断为胰腺NET的患者。记录手术相关数据,包括肿瘤的大小和位置,以及细胞技术人员的存在。将每个FNA的结果与最终的临床病理诊断进行比较,以计算灵敏度。结果:对28例行FNA的患者进行分析,其中EUS 19例,CT 9例。EUS-FNA诊断的NETs小于CT-FNA(2.7±0.9cm vs. 6.5±2.1cm, p = 0.009),更常见于胰头(47.4% vs. 11.1%, p = 0.035)。EUS-FNA与CT-FNA标本的敏感性差异无统计学意义(73.7% vs. 88.9%, p = 0.33)。结论:eus引导下的FNA诊断胰腺NETs的敏感性与ct引导下的FNA相当,但其主要优势在于对胰腺头部较小的胰腺NETs的诊断。它也可能是诊断多灶性胰腺NETs在MEN I综合征的首选方法。
Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration Accurately Diagnoses Smaller Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors Compared To Computer Tomography-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration.
Introduction: The role of EUS-guided FNA as a highly sensitive modality in the diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma is well documented. However, there is little published data on the role of EUS-FNA in diagnosing pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs).
Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the sensitivity of EUS-FNA to that of CT-FNA for diagnosing pancreatic NETs.
Methods: This is a single institution retrospective analysis of the operating characteristics of EUS-FNA and CT-FNA in detecting pancreatic NETs. Only patients with a final diagnosis of pancreatic NET were selected for this study. Procedure related data, including tumor size and location, and presence of a cytotechnologist were recorded. The results of each FNA were compared to the final clinico-pathological diagnosis to calculate sensitivity.
Results: Twenty-eight patients undergoing FNA (19 by EUS, 9 by CT) were analyzed. NETs diagnosed by EUS-FNA were smaller compared with CT-FNA (2.7 ± 0.9cm vs. 6.5 ± 2.1cm, p = 0.009) and were more often found in the pancreatic head (47.4% vs. 11.1%, p = 0.035). There were no significant differences in sensitivity between EUS-FNA and CT-FNA specimens (73.7% vs. 88.9%, p = 0.33).
Conclusion: EUS-guided FNA is as sensitive as CT-guided FNA in diagnosing pancreatic NETs, but its main advantage is in the diagnosis of smaller pancreatic NETs in the head of the pancreas. It may also be the preferred approach in the diagnosis of multifocal pancreatic NETs in the setting of MEN I Syndrome.