AIM To evaluate the cytological diagnostic capacity and sample quality of the slow-pull technique and compare them with different suction techniques.METHODS From July 2010 to December 2015, 102 patients with pancreati...AIM To evaluate the cytological diagnostic capacity and sample quality of the slow-pull technique and compare them with different suction techniques.METHODS From July 2010 to December 2015, 102 patients with pancreatic solid lesions who underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration(EUS-FNA) with 22-gauge needles were retrospectively evaluated. EUS-FNA diagnosis was based on a cytological examination, and final diagnosis was based on a comprehensive standard of cytological diagnosis, surgical pathology and clinical or imaging follow-up. Cytological specimens were characterized for cellularity and blood contamination. The cytological diagnostic capacity and sample quality of the slow-pull technique and suction techniques with 5-m L/10-m L/20-m L syringes were analyzed.RESULTS Of all of the EUS-FNA procedures, the slow-pull technique and suction techniques with 5-m L/10-m L/20-m L syringes were used in 31, 19, 34 and 18 procedures, respectively. There were significant differences between these four suction techniques in terms of cytological diagnostic accuracy(90.3% vs 63.2% vs 58.8% vs 55.6%, P = 0.019), sensitivity(88.2% vs 41.7% vs 40.0% vs 36.4%, P = 0.009) and blood contamination(score ≥ 2 for 29.0% vs 52.6% vs 70.6% vs 72.2%, P = 0.003). The accuracy and sensitivity of the slow-pull technique were significantly higher than those of the suction techniques using 5-m L(P = 0.03, P = 0.014), 10-m L(P = 0.005; P = 0.006) and 20-mL syringes(P = 0.01, P = 0.01). Blood contamination was significantly lower in the slow-pull technique than in the suction techniques with 10-m L(P = 0.001) and 20-mL syringes(P = 0.007).CONCLUSION The slow-pull technique may increase the cytological diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity with slight blood contamination during EUS-FNA when using 22-gauge needles for solid pancreatic masses.展开更多
BACKGROUND While endoscopic ultrasound(EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration(FNA)is considered a preferred technique for tissue sampling for solid lesions,fine needle biopsy(FNB)has recently been developed.AIM To compare...BACKGROUND While endoscopic ultrasound(EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration(FNA)is considered a preferred technique for tissue sampling for solid lesions,fine needle biopsy(FNB)has recently been developed.AIM To compare the accuracy of FNB vs FNA in determining the diagnosis of solid lesions.METHODS A retrospective,multi-center study of EUS-guided tissue sampling using FNA vs FNB needles.Measured outcomes included diagnostic test characteristics(i.e.,sensitivity,specificity,accuracy),use of rapid on-site evaluation(ROSE),and adverse events.Subgroup analyses were performed by type of lesion and diagnostic yield with or without ROSE.A multivariable logistic regression was also performed.RESULTS A total of 1168 patients with solid lesions(n=468 FNA;n=700 FNB)underwent EUS-guided sampling.Mean age was 65.02±12.13 years.Overall,sensitivity,specificity and accuracy were superior for FNB vs FNA(84.70%vs 74.53%;99.29%vs 96.62%;and 87.62%vs 81.55%,respectively;P<0.001).On subgroup analyses,sensitivity,specificity,and accuracy of FNB alone were similar to FNA+ROSE[(81.66%vs 86.45%;P=0.142),(100%vs 100%;P=1.00)and(88.40%vs 85.43%;P=0.320].There were no difference in diagnostic yield of FNB alone vs FNB+ROSE(P>0.05).Multivariate analysis showed no significant predictor for better accuracy.On subgroup analyses,FNB was superior to FNA for non-pancreatic lesions;however,there was no difference between the techniques among pancreatic lesions.One adverse event was reported in each group.CONCLUSION FNB is superior to FNA with equivalent diagnostic test characteristics compared to FNA+ROSE in the diagnosis of non-pancreatic solid lesions.Our results suggest that EUS-FNB may eliminate the need of ROSE and should be employed as a first-line method in the diagnosis of solid lesions.展开更多
Elastography is one of technologies assisting diagnosis ofsolid pancreatic lesions(SPL). This technology has been previously used for measuring the stiffness of various organs based on a principle of "harder the ...Elastography is one of technologies assisting diagnosis ofsolid pancreatic lesions(SPL). This technology has been previously used for measuring the stiffness of various organs based on a principle of "harder the lesions, higher chance for malignancy". Two elastography techniques; strain and shear wave elastography, are available. For endoscopic ultrasound(EUS), only the former is existing. To interpret results of EUS elastography for SPL, 3 methods are used:(1) pattern recognition;(2) strain ratio; and (3) strain histogram. Based on results of existing studies, these 3 techniques provide high sensitivity but low to moderate specificity and accuracy rate. This review will summarize all available information in order to update current situation of using elastography for an evaluation of SPLs to readers.展开更多
Background： The criterion of two target lesions per organ in the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors （RECIST） version I. 1 is an arbitrary one, being supported by no objective evidence. The optimal number ...Background： The criterion of two target lesions per organ in the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors （RECIST） version I. 1 is an arbitrary one, being supported by no objective evidence. The optimal number of target lesions per organ still needs to be investigated. We compared tumor responses using the RECIST 1.1 （measuring two target lesions per organ） and modified RECIST I. 1 （measuring the single largest lesion in each organ） in patients with small cell lung cancer （SCLC）. Methods： We reviewed medical records of patients with SCLC who received first-line treatment between January 2004 and December 2014 and compared tumor responses according to the two criteria using computed tomography. Results： There were a total of 34 patients who had at least two target lesions in any organ according to the RECIST 1.1 during the study period. The differences in the percentage changes of the sum of tumor measurements between RECIST 1.1 and modified RECIST 1.1 were all within 13%. Seven patients showed complete response and fourteen showed partial response according to the RECIST I.I. The overall response rate was 61.8%. When assessing with the modified RECIST 1.1 instead of the RECIST 1.1, tumor responses showed perfect concordance between the two criteria （k= 1.0）. Conclusions： The modified RECIST 1.I showed perfect agreement with the original RECIST 1.I in the assessment of tumor response of SCLC. Our result suggests that it may be enough to measure the single largest target lesion per organ for evaluating tumor response.展开更多
目的探讨多层螺旋CT动态增强成像技术在肺部孤立性结节(SPN)良恶性鉴别诊断中的应用价值。方法采用回顾性研究方法,选取2017年1月至2019年12月连云港市第二人民医院收治的SPN患者70例,将患者CT常规扫描与动态增强扫描的结果进行分析,以...目的探讨多层螺旋CT动态增强成像技术在肺部孤立性结节(SPN)良恶性鉴别诊断中的应用价值。方法采用回顾性研究方法,选取2017年1月至2019年12月连云港市第二人民医院收治的SPN患者70例,将患者CT常规扫描与动态增强扫描的结果进行分析,以病理穿刺诊断结果为金标准,分析CT动态增强扫描的诊断结果,对比常规与动态增强扫描的CT值变化。结果 SPN在病理穿刺诊断结果中,良性46例,恶性24例。SPN在CT动态增强扫描中,良性43例,恶性27例,与病理穿刺诊断比较,误诊率与漏诊率差异均无统计学意义(P> 0.05)。CT动态增强扫描的敏感度为93.02%,特异度为77.78%,阳性预测值为86.96%,诊断符合率为87.14%。恶性SPN的常规扫描(25.52±11.39 Hu vs.13.24±5.79 Hu)与动态增强扫描CT值(79.38±7.68 Hu vs.17.49±5.63 Hu)均明显高于良性SPN,良性与恶性SPN动态增强扫描CT值改变幅度明显大于常规扫描,差异均具有统计学意义(P <0.05)。结论多层螺旋CT动态增强成像技术能够准确鉴别诊断SPN的良恶性。展开更多
文摘AIM To evaluate the cytological diagnostic capacity and sample quality of the slow-pull technique and compare them with different suction techniques.METHODS From July 2010 to December 2015, 102 patients with pancreatic solid lesions who underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration(EUS-FNA) with 22-gauge needles were retrospectively evaluated. EUS-FNA diagnosis was based on a cytological examination, and final diagnosis was based on a comprehensive standard of cytological diagnosis, surgical pathology and clinical or imaging follow-up. Cytological specimens were characterized for cellularity and blood contamination. The cytological diagnostic capacity and sample quality of the slow-pull technique and suction techniques with 5-m L/10-m L/20-m L syringes were analyzed.RESULTS Of all of the EUS-FNA procedures, the slow-pull technique and suction techniques with 5-m L/10-m L/20-m L syringes were used in 31, 19, 34 and 18 procedures, respectively. There were significant differences between these four suction techniques in terms of cytological diagnostic accuracy(90.3% vs 63.2% vs 58.8% vs 55.6%, P = 0.019), sensitivity(88.2% vs 41.7% vs 40.0% vs 36.4%, P = 0.009) and blood contamination(score ≥ 2 for 29.0% vs 52.6% vs 70.6% vs 72.2%, P = 0.003). The accuracy and sensitivity of the slow-pull technique were significantly higher than those of the suction techniques using 5-m L(P = 0.03, P = 0.014), 10-m L(P = 0.005; P = 0.006) and 20-mL syringes(P = 0.01, P = 0.01). Blood contamination was significantly lower in the slow-pull technique than in the suction techniques with 10-m L(P = 0.001) and 20-mL syringes(P = 0.007).CONCLUSION The slow-pull technique may increase the cytological diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity with slight blood contamination during EUS-FNA when using 22-gauge needles for solid pancreatic masses.
基金the Research Ethics Committee from Partners Human Research(Protocol No.2003P001665).
文摘BACKGROUND While endoscopic ultrasound(EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration(FNA)is considered a preferred technique for tissue sampling for solid lesions,fine needle biopsy(FNB)has recently been developed.AIM To compare the accuracy of FNB vs FNA in determining the diagnosis of solid lesions.METHODS A retrospective,multi-center study of EUS-guided tissue sampling using FNA vs FNB needles.Measured outcomes included diagnostic test characteristics(i.e.,sensitivity,specificity,accuracy),use of rapid on-site evaluation(ROSE),and adverse events.Subgroup analyses were performed by type of lesion and diagnostic yield with or without ROSE.A multivariable logistic regression was also performed.RESULTS A total of 1168 patients with solid lesions(n=468 FNA;n=700 FNB)underwent EUS-guided sampling.Mean age was 65.02±12.13 years.Overall,sensitivity,specificity and accuracy were superior for FNB vs FNA(84.70%vs 74.53%;99.29%vs 96.62%;and 87.62%vs 81.55%,respectively;P<0.001).On subgroup analyses,sensitivity,specificity,and accuracy of FNB alone were similar to FNA+ROSE[(81.66%vs 86.45%;P=0.142),(100%vs 100%;P=1.00)and(88.40%vs 85.43%;P=0.320].There were no difference in diagnostic yield of FNB alone vs FNB+ROSE(P>0.05).Multivariate analysis showed no significant predictor for better accuracy.On subgroup analyses,FNB was superior to FNA for non-pancreatic lesions;however,there was no difference between the techniques among pancreatic lesions.One adverse event was reported in each group.CONCLUSION FNB is superior to FNA with equivalent diagnostic test characteristics compared to FNA+ROSE in the diagnosis of non-pancreatic solid lesions.Our results suggest that EUS-FNB may eliminate the need of ROSE and should be employed as a first-line method in the diagnosis of solid lesions.
文摘Elastography is one of technologies assisting diagnosis ofsolid pancreatic lesions(SPL). This technology has been previously used for measuring the stiffness of various organs based on a principle of "harder the lesions, higher chance for malignancy". Two elastography techniques; strain and shear wave elastography, are available. For endoscopic ultrasound(EUS), only the former is existing. To interpret results of EUS elastography for SPL, 3 methods are used:(1) pattern recognition;(2) strain ratio; and (3) strain histogram. Based on results of existing studies, these 3 techniques provide high sensitivity but low to moderate specificity and accuracy rate. This review will summarize all available information in order to update current situation of using elastography for an evaluation of SPLs to readers.
文摘Background： The criterion of two target lesions per organ in the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors （RECIST） version I. 1 is an arbitrary one, being supported by no objective evidence. The optimal number of target lesions per organ still needs to be investigated. We compared tumor responses using the RECIST 1.1 （measuring two target lesions per organ） and modified RECIST I. 1 （measuring the single largest lesion in each organ） in patients with small cell lung cancer （SCLC）. Methods： We reviewed medical records of patients with SCLC who received first-line treatment between January 2004 and December 2014 and compared tumor responses according to the two criteria using computed tomography. Results： There were a total of 34 patients who had at least two target lesions in any organ according to the RECIST 1.1 during the study period. The differences in the percentage changes of the sum of tumor measurements between RECIST 1.1 and modified RECIST 1.1 were all within 13%. Seven patients showed complete response and fourteen showed partial response according to the RECIST I.I. The overall response rate was 61.8%. When assessing with the modified RECIST 1.1 instead of the RECIST 1.1, tumor responses showed perfect concordance between the two criteria （k= 1.0）. Conclusions： The modified RECIST 1.I showed perfect agreement with the original RECIST 1.I in the assessment of tumor response of SCLC. Our result suggests that it may be enough to measure the single largest target lesion per organ for evaluating tumor response.
文摘目的探讨多层螺旋CT动态增强成像技术在肺部孤立性结节(SPN)良恶性鉴别诊断中的应用价值。方法采用回顾性研究方法,选取2017年1月至2019年12月连云港市第二人民医院收治的SPN患者70例,将患者CT常规扫描与动态增强扫描的结果进行分析,以病理穿刺诊断结果为金标准,分析CT动态增强扫描的诊断结果,对比常规与动态增强扫描的CT值变化。结果 SPN在病理穿刺诊断结果中,良性46例,恶性24例。SPN在CT动态增强扫描中,良性43例,恶性27例,与病理穿刺诊断比较,误诊率与漏诊率差异均无统计学意义(P> 0.05)。CT动态增强扫描的敏感度为93.02%,特异度为77.78%,阳性预测值为86.96%,诊断符合率为87.14%。恶性SPN的常规扫描(25.52±11.39 Hu vs.13.24±5.79 Hu)与动态增强扫描CT值(79.38±7.68 Hu vs.17.49±5.63 Hu)均明显高于良性SPN,良性与恶性SPN动态增强扫描CT值改变幅度明显大于常规扫描,差异均具有统计学意义(P <0.05)。结论多层螺旋CT动态增强成像技术能够准确鉴别诊断SPN的良恶性。
