BACKGROUND Currently,there is insufficient data about the accuracy in the diagnosing of pancreatic cystic lesions(PCLs),especially with novel endoscopic techniques such as with direct intracystic micro-forceps biopsy(...BACKGROUND Currently,there is insufficient data about the accuracy in the diagnosing of pancreatic cystic lesions(PCLs),especially with novel endoscopic techniques such as with direct intracystic micro-forceps biopsy(mFB)and needle-based confocal laser-endomicroscopy(nCLE).AIM To compare the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound(EUS)and associated techniques for the detection of potentially malignant PCLs:EUS-guided fine needle aspiration(EUS-FNA),contrast-enhanced EUS(CE-EUS),EUS-guided fiberoptic probe cystoscopy(cystoscopy),mFB,and nCLE.METHODS This was a single-center,retrospective study.We identified patients who had undergone EUS,with or without additional diagnostic techniques,and had been diagnosed with PCLs.We determined agreement among malignancy after 24-mo follow-up findings with detection of potentially malignant PCLs via the EUSguided techniques and/or EUS-guided biopsy when available(EUS malignancy detection).RESULTS A total of 129 patients were included, with EUS performed alone in 47/129. In 82/129 patients,EUS procedures were performed with additional EUS-FNA (21/82), CE-EUS (20/82), cystoscopy(27/82), mFB (36/82), nCLE (44/82). Agreement between EUS malignancy detection and the 24-mo follow-up findings was higher when associated with additional diagnostic techniques thanEUS alone [62/82 (75.6%) vs 8/47 (17%);OR 4.35, 95%CI: 2.70-7.37;P < 0.001]. The highestmalignancy detection accuracy was reached when nCLE and direct intracystic mFB were bothperformed, with a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value andobserved agreement of 100%, 89.4%, 77.8%, 100% and 92.3%, respectively (P < 0.001 comparedwith EUS-alone).CONCLUSIONThe combined use of EUS-guided mFB and nCLE improves detection of potentially malignantPCLs compared with EUS-alone, EUS-FNA, CE-EUS or cystoscopy.展开更多
文摘BACKGROUND Currently,there is insufficient data about the accuracy in the diagnosing of pancreatic cystic lesions(PCLs),especially with novel endoscopic techniques such as with direct intracystic micro-forceps biopsy(mFB)and needle-based confocal laser-endomicroscopy(nCLE).AIM To compare the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound(EUS)and associated techniques for the detection of potentially malignant PCLs:EUS-guided fine needle aspiration(EUS-FNA),contrast-enhanced EUS(CE-EUS),EUS-guided fiberoptic probe cystoscopy(cystoscopy),mFB,and nCLE.METHODS This was a single-center,retrospective study.We identified patients who had undergone EUS,with or without additional diagnostic techniques,and had been diagnosed with PCLs.We determined agreement among malignancy after 24-mo follow-up findings with detection of potentially malignant PCLs via the EUSguided techniques and/or EUS-guided biopsy when available(EUS malignancy detection).RESULTS A total of 129 patients were included, with EUS performed alone in 47/129. In 82/129 patients,EUS procedures were performed with additional EUS-FNA (21/82), CE-EUS (20/82), cystoscopy(27/82), mFB (36/82), nCLE (44/82). Agreement between EUS malignancy detection and the 24-mo follow-up findings was higher when associated with additional diagnostic techniques thanEUS alone [62/82 (75.6%) vs 8/47 (17%);OR 4.35, 95%CI: 2.70-7.37;P < 0.001]. The highestmalignancy detection accuracy was reached when nCLE and direct intracystic mFB were bothperformed, with a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value andobserved agreement of 100%, 89.4%, 77.8%, 100% and 92.3%, respectively (P < 0.001 comparedwith EUS-alone).CONCLUSIONThe combined use of EUS-guided mFB and nCLE improves detection of potentially malignantPCLs compared with EUS-alone, EUS-FNA, CE-EUS or cystoscopy.
