AIM To evaluate the diagnostic value and safety mainly regarding incidents of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration(EUS-FNA) for pancreatic cystic lesions(PCLs).METHODS A total of 150 consecutive patient...AIM To evaluate the diagnostic value and safety mainly regarding incidents of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration(EUS-FNA) for pancreatic cystic lesions(PCLs).METHODS A total of 150 consecutive patients with suspected PCLs were prospectively enrolled from April 2015 to November 2016. We finally enrolled 140 patients undergoing EUS-FNA. We compared the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA and pathological diagnosis, which is regarded as the gold standard, for PCLs. Patients undergoing EUS-FNA at least 1 wk preoperatively were monitored for incidents and adverse events to evaluate its safety.RESULTS There were 88(62.9%) women and 52(37.1%) men among 140 patients, with a mean age of 50.1(± 15.4) years. There were 67 cysts located in the head/uncinate of the pancreas and 67 in the body/tail, and 6 patients had at least 1 cyst in the pancreas. There were 75 patients undergoing surgery and 55 undergoing EUS-FNA with interval at least 1 wk before other operations, with 3 patients undergoing the procedure twice. The accuracy of EUS-FNA in differentiating benign and malignant lesions was 97.3%(73/75), while the accuracy of characterizing PCL subtype was 84.0%(63/75). The incident rate was 37.9%(22/58), whereas only 1 AE was observed in 58 cases.CONCLUSION EUS-FNA is effective and safe for diagnosis of PCLs, however procedure-related incidents are common. Caution should be taken in patients undergoing EUSFNA.展开更多
文摘AIM To evaluate the diagnostic value and safety mainly regarding incidents of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration(EUS-FNA) for pancreatic cystic lesions(PCLs).METHODS A total of 150 consecutive patients with suspected PCLs were prospectively enrolled from April 2015 to November 2016. We finally enrolled 140 patients undergoing EUS-FNA. We compared the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA and pathological diagnosis, which is regarded as the gold standard, for PCLs. Patients undergoing EUS-FNA at least 1 wk preoperatively were monitored for incidents and adverse events to evaluate its safety.RESULTS There were 88(62.9%) women and 52(37.1%) men among 140 patients, with a mean age of 50.1(± 15.4) years. There were 67 cysts located in the head/uncinate of the pancreas and 67 in the body/tail, and 6 patients had at least 1 cyst in the pancreas. There were 75 patients undergoing surgery and 55 undergoing EUS-FNA with interval at least 1 wk before other operations, with 3 patients undergoing the procedure twice. The accuracy of EUS-FNA in differentiating benign and malignant lesions was 97.3%(73/75), while the accuracy of characterizing PCL subtype was 84.0%(63/75). The incident rate was 37.9%(22/58), whereas only 1 AE was observed in 58 cases.CONCLUSION EUS-FNA is effective and safe for diagnosis of PCLs, however procedure-related incidents are common. Caution should be taken in patients undergoing EUSFNA.
