Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology diagnosis of solid pseudopapillary tumor of the pancreas: A case report and literature review

We describe the clinical, imaging and cytopathological features of solid pseudopapillary tumor of the pancreas (SPTP) diagnosed by endoscopic ultrasound- guided (EUS-guided) fine-needle aspiration (FNA). A 17-year-old woman was admitted to our hospital with complaints of an unexplained episodic abdominal pain for 2 mo and a short history of hypertension in the endocrinology clinic. Clinical laboratory examinations revealed polycystic ovary syndrome, splenomegaly and low serum amylase and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels. Computed tomography (CT) analysis revealed a mass of the pancreatic tail with solid and cystic consistency. EUS confirmed the mass, both in body and tail of the pancreas, with distinct borders, which caused dilation of the peripheral part of the pancreatic duct (major diameter 3.7 mm). The patient underwent EUS-FNA. EUS-FNA cytology specimens consisted of single cells and aggregates of uniform malignant cells, forming microadenoid structures, branching, papillary clusters with delicate fibrovascular cores and nuclear overlapping. Naked capillaries were also seen. The nuclei of malignant cells were round or oval, eccentric with fine granular chromatin, small nucleoli and nuclear grooves in some of them. The malignant cells were periodic acid Schiff (PAS)-Alcian blue (+) and immunocytochemically they were vimentin (+), CA 19.9 (+), synaptophysin (+), chromogranin (-), neuro-specific enolase (-), a1- antitrypsin and a1-antichymotrypsin focal positive. Cytologic findings were strongly suggestive of SPTP. Biopsy confirmed the above cytologic diagnosis. EUS- guided FNA diagnosis of SPTP is accurate. EUS findings,cytomorphologic features and immunostains of cell block help distinguish SPTP from pancreatic endocrine tumors, acinar cell carcinoma and papillary mucinous carcinoma.

Diagnostic value of liquid-based cytology and smear cytology in pancreatic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Smear cytology(SC)using endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration(EUS-FNA)is the established and traditional choice for diagnosing pancreatic lesions.Liquid-based cytology(LBC)is a novel alternative cytological method,however,the comparative diagnostic efficacy of LBC remains inconclusive.AIM To examine the diagnostic efficacy of LBC and SC for pancreatic specimens obtained through EUS-FNA via a systematic review and meta-analysis.METHODS A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed,EMBASE,the Cochrane Library,and Web of Science.The numbers of true positives,false positives,true negatives,and false negatives for each cytological test(LBC and CS)were extracted from the included studies.The pooled sensitivity and specificity and the area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve(AUC)were calculated,and the AUC was compared by Tukey's multiple comparisons test.The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies II tool.RESULTS A total of 1656 patients in eight studies were included.The pooled sensitivity and specificity and the AUC for LBC were 0.76(95%CI:0.72-0.79),1.00(95%CI:0.98-1.00),and 0.9174,respectively,for diagnosing pancreatic lesions.The pooled estimates for SC were as follows:Sensitivity,0.68(95%CI:0.64-0.71);specificity,0.99(95%CI:0.96-100.00);and AUC,0.9714.Similarly,the corresponding values for LBC combined with SC were 0.87(95%CI:0.84-0.90),0.99(95%CI:0.96-1.00),and 0.9894.Tukey’s multiple comparisons test was used to compare the sensitivities and AUCs of the three diagnostic methods;statistically significant differences were found between the three methods,and LBC combined with SC was superior to both LBC(P<0.05)and SC(P<0.05).The pooled sensitivity and AUC did not change significantly in the sensitivity analysis.CONCLUSION LBC may be sensitive than SC in the cytological diagnosis of pancreatic lesions,however,the superior diagnostic performance of their combination emphasizes their integrated usage in the clinical evaluation of pancreatic lesions.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology in pancreaticobiliary carcinomas:diagnostic efficacy of cell-block immunocyto-chemistry

BACKGROUND： Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology was demonstrated to be a useful tool for the diagnosis and staging of pancreaticobiliary neoplastic le- sions. Nonetheless, the diagnostic value of this procedure may be limited by low cellularity of the specimen, contamination of intestinal cells and unfeasibility of ancillary immunocy- tochemical procedures. The present study was to evaluate its usefulness in the diagnosis of neoplastic lesions.

Liquid Based Cytology of Cell Remnants in Needles Used for Breast Fine Needle Aspiration

This study examined cells contained in needles used for the collection of breast fine needle aspirates for the detection of malignant cells trapped in the needles. Remnants of cells contained in 50 needles used for the collection of scanty breast fine needle aspirates were examined by the liquid based cytology technique and compared with the conventional cytological technique of specimens in the corresponding syringes. The breast specimens were collected with clean sterile needles attached to the syringes. Smears were made and stained by the conventional method. The needles were removed from the syringes and a fixative was withdrawn into the syringes and the syringes were recapped with the needles. The fixative containing the specimen was then completely discharged into a centrifuge tube through the needles and treated by the liquid based cytology technique. The study revealed that cells were found trapped in all the needles used for the collection of breast FNA. 6% of them were positive for malignancy, similar to results obtained in the conventional method. Needles used for the collection of breast FNA should be examined before malignancy is completely ruled out particularly in extremely scanty specimens with a clinical suspicion of malignancy.

Comparison of cytological and histological preparations in the diagnosis of pancreatic malignancies using endoscopic ultrasoundguided fine needle aspiration

BACKGROUND:Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration(EUS-FNA) has become a crucial diagnostic technique for pancreatic malignancies.The specimen obtained by EUS-FNA can be prepared for either cytological or histological examinations.This study was to compare diagnostic performance of cytological and histological preparations using EUSFNA in the same lesions when pancreatic malignancies were suspected.METHODS:One hundred and eighteen patients who underwent EUS-FNA for suspected pancreatic malignancies were consecutively enrolled.All procedures were conducted by a single echoendoscopist under the same conditions.Four adequate preparations were obtained by 22-gauge needles with 20 to-and-fro movements for each pass.The 4 preparations included 2 cytological and 2 histological specimens.The pathologic reviews of all specimens were conducted independently by a single experienced cytopathologist.Sensitivity,specificity,and accuracy of the 2 preparations were compared.RESULTS:The enrolled patients consisted of 62 males(52.5%),with the mean age of 64.6±10.5 years.Surgery was performed in 23(19.5%) patients.One hundred and sixteen(98.3%) lesions were classified as malignant,while 2(1.7%) were benign.Sensitivity of cytology and histology were 87.9% and 81.9%,respectively,with no significant difference(P=0.190).Accuracy was also not significantly different.Cytological preparation was more sensitive when the size of lesion was <3 cm(86.7% vs 68.9%,P=0.033).CONCLUSIONS:Our results suggested that the diagnostic performances of cytological and histological preparations are not significantly different for the diagnosis of pancreatic malignancies.However,cytological preparation might be more sensitive for pancreatic lesions <3 cm.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration and useful ancillary methods

The role of endoscopic ultrasound(EUS) in evaluating pancreatic pathology has been well documented from the beginning of its clinical use. High spatial resolution and the close proximity to the evaluated organs within the mediastinum and abdominal cavity allow detection of small focal lesions and precise tissue acquisition from suspected lesions within the reach of this method. Fine needle aspiration(FNA) is considered of additional value to EUS and is performed to obtain tissue diagnosis. Tissue acquisition from suspected lesions for cytological or histological analysis allows, not only the differentiation between malignant and non-malignant lesions, but, in most cases, also the accurate distinction between the various types of malignant lesions. It is well documented that the best results are achieved only if an adequate sample is obtained for further analysis, if the material is processed in an appropriate way, and if adequate ancillary methods are performed. This is a multi-step process and could be quite a challenge in some cases. In this article, we discuss the technical aspects of tissue acquisition by EUS-guided-FNA(EUS-FNA), as well as the role of an on-site cytopathologist, various means of specimen processing, and the selection of the appropriate ancillary method for providing an accurate tissue diagnosis and maximizing the yield of this method. The main goal of this review is to alert endosonographers, not only to the different possibilities of tissue acquisition, namely EUS-FNA, but also to bring to their attention the importance of proper sample processing in the evaluation of various lesions in the gastrointestinal tract and other accessible organs. All aspects of tissue acquisition(needles, suction, use of stylet, complications, etc.) have been well discussed lately. Adequate tissue samples enable comprehensive diagnoses, which answer the main clinical questions, thus enabling targeted therapy.

Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles

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.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy-Recent topics and technical tips

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNA) is a useful procedure that enables reliable pathological diagnoses of pancreatobiliary diseases, subepithelial lesions, and swollen lymph nodes. In recent years, a pathological diagnosis based on EUS-FNA has made it possible to provide accurate treatment methods not only in these fields, but also in respiratory organs and otorhinolaryngology. This review discusses the latest topics pertaining to EUS-FNA as well as procedural tips.

22-gauge core vs 22-gauge aspiration needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of abdominal masses

AIM To compare the aspiration needle(AN) and core biopsy needle(PC) in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration(EUS-FNA) of abdominal masses.METHODS Consecutive patients referred for EUS-FNA were included in this prospective single-center trial. Each patient underwent a puncture of the lesion with both standard 22-gauge(G) AN(Echo Tip Ultra; Cook Medical, Bloomington, Indiana, United States) and the novel 22 G PC(Echo Tip Pro Core; Cook Medical, Bloomington, Indiana, United States) in a randomized fashion; histology was attempted in the PC group only. The main study endpoint was the overall diagnostic accuracy, including the contribution of histology to the final diagnosis. Secondary outcome measures included material adequacy, number of needle passes, and complications.RESULTS Fifty six consecutive patients(29 men; mean age 68 years) with pancreatic lesions(n = 38), lymphadenopathy(n = 13), submucosal tumors(n = 4), or others lesions(n = 1) underwent EUS-FNA using both of the needles in a randomized order. AN and PC reached similar overall results for diagnostic accuracy(AN: 88.9 vs PC: 96.1, P = 0.25), specimen adequacy(AN: 96.4% vs PC: 91.1%, P = 0.38), mean number of passes(AN: 1.5 vs PC: 1.7, P = 0.14), mean cellularity score(AN: 1.7 vs PC: 1.1, P = 0.058), and complications(none). A diagnosis on the basis of histology was achieved in the PC group in 36(64.3%) patients, and in 2 of those as the sole modality. In patients with available histology the mean cellularity score was higher for AN(AN: 1.7 vs PC: 1.0, P = 0.034); no other differences were of statistical significance.CONCLUSION Both needles achieved high overall diagnostic yields and similar performance characteristics for cytological diagnosis; histological analysis was only possible in 2/3 of cases with the new needle.

FNAC联合FNA-Tg检测在甲状腺乳头状癌颈侧区淋巴结转移中的诊断价值

目的探讨超声引导下细针穿刺细胞学检查(FNAC)联合细针穿刺洗脱液甲状腺球蛋白(FNA-Tg)在甲状腺乳头状癌(PTC)颈侧区淋巴结转移中的诊断价值。方法回顾性分析行颈侧区淋巴结清扫术的200例PTC患者的临床资料,术前超声评估颈侧区有可疑转移淋巴结236枚,术后病理证实转移性淋巴结178枚,非转移性淋巴结58枚,所有患者均行FNAC、FNA-Tg检查。以术后病理结果为金标准,比较FNAC、FNA-Tg、FNAC联合FNA-Tg的诊断结果及诊断效能。结果FNAC联合FNA-Tg诊断PTC颈侧区淋巴结转移的灵敏度、准确度、阴性预测值高于单一诊断方法,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论FNAC与FNA-Tg检测方法在临床中能够用于诊断PTC颈侧区淋巴结转移,两者联合检测可以进一步提高诊断效能,值得推广及应用。

Impact of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy for diagnosis of pancreatic masses

AIM: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of histologi- cal evaluation of pancreatic tissue samples obtained by a modified method for recovering and processing the endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspira- tion (FNA) material in the differential diagnosis of pan- creatic solid masses. METHODS: Sixty-two consecutive patients with pan- creatic masses were prospectively studied. EUS was performed by the linear scanning Pentax FG-38UX ech- oendoscope. Three FNAs (22G needle) were carried out during each procedure. The materials obtained with first and second punctures were processed for cytological study. Materials of the third puncture were recovered into 10% formol solution by careful injection of saline so- lution through the needle, and processed for histological study. RESULTS: Length of the core specimen obtained for his- tological analysis was 6.5 ± 5.3 mm (range 1-22 mm). Cytological and histological samples were considered as adequate in 51 (82.3%) and 52 cases (83.9%), respec- tively. Overall sensitivity of both pancreatic cytology and histology for diagnosis of malignancy was 68.4%. Con- trary to cytology, histology was able to diagnose tumours other than adenocarcinomas, and all cases of inflamma- tory masses. Combination of cytology and histology al- lowed obtaining an adequate sample in 56 cases (90.3%), with a global sensitivity of 84.21%, specificity of 100% and an overall accuracy of 90.32%. The complication rate was 1.6%.CONCLUSION: Adequate pancreatic core specimens forhistological examination can be obtained by EUS-guided FNA. This technique is mainly useful for the diagnosis of different types of pancreatic tumours and evaluation of benign diseases.

高频彩色多普勒超声联合US-FNAC在甲状腺癌诊断中的应用价值

目的探讨高频彩色多普勒超声(HF-CDU)联合超声辅助下细针穿刺细胞学检查(US-FNAC)在甲状腺癌鉴别诊断中的应用价值。方法将2020年2月至2023年3月在安徽医科大学直属附属六安医院(六安市人民医院)收治的110例甲状腺结节患者纳入本次回顾性研究。患者均接受HF-CFU检查和US-FNAC检查,以术后病理检查结果为“金标准”,分析不同性质结节的高频彩色多普勒超声的影像学特征,比较HF-CDU检查和US-FNAC单独检测和二者联合检测在甲状腺癌诊断中的灵敏性、特异性、准确性、假阳性和假阴性。结果110例患者共计有133个甲状腺结节,术后病理检查结果显示,恶性结节占比58.65%(78/133),良性结节占比41.35%(55/133);单发结节占比80.00%(88/110),多发结节占比20.00%(22/110)。超声检查显示,恶性结节的主要特征是血流分布多、纵横比≥1、微小钙化、形态不规则、边界毛糙或模糊、内部低或极低回声。HF-CDU检查的灵敏性、特异性、准确度、假阳性率和假阴性率分别为85.90%、89.09%、87.22%、10.91%和14.10%;US-FNAC检查的分别为89.74%、92.73%、90.98%、7.27%、10.26%;联合检测的分别为96.15%、94.55%、95.49%、5.45%、3.85%,联合检测的灵敏性、特异性、准确性、假阳性和假阴性率均优于HF-CDU、US-FNAC单独检测。结论HF-CDU、US-FNAC联合检测可有效提高甲状腺癌的确诊率,能够为患者早诊断、早治疗、提高预后提供可靠的方法。

超声引导下FNAC联合BRAFV600e基因检测对甲状腺癌预后的价值研究

目的探究超声引导下细针穿刺细胞学(FNAC)联合BRAFV600e基因检测在甲状腺癌预后评估中的临床价值。方法选择2020年8月至2022年12月于长江大学附属荆州医院被确诊为甲状腺癌并接受甲状腺癌根治术的121例可疑淋巴结转移患者为研究对象,所有患者术前均接受超声引导下FNAC检测以及BRAFV600e基因检测,以患者术后病理检测结果为金标准,分别计算超声引导下FNAC检测以及BRAFV600e基因检测对甲状腺癌淋巴结转移的诊断价值。结果以病理结果为金标准,超声引导下FNAC对甲状腺癌淋巴结转移的诊断一致性为71.07%(86/121)、诊断敏感度为73.53%(75/102)、诊断特异度为57.89%(11/19);BRAFV600e基因检测对甲状腺癌淋巴结转移的诊断一致性为83.47%(101/121)、诊断敏感度为87.25%(89/102)、诊断特异度为63.16%(12/19);超声引导下FNAC联合BRAFV600e基因检测对甲状腺癌淋巴结转移的诊断一致性为97.52%(118/121)、诊断敏感度为98.04%(100/102)、诊断特异度为94.74%(18/19)。联合检测的诊断一致性、敏感度和特异度均明显高于任一单独检测方式,组间比较差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论超声引导下FNAC联合BRAFV600e基因检测对甲状腺癌出现淋巴结转移具有较好的诊断效能,较任一单独检测效能更优,建议将其应用于甲状腺癌患者是否出现淋巴结转移的鉴别中。

Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle tissue acquisition:Where we stand in 2013?

Since its introduction,endoscopic ultrasound(EUS)guided fine needle aspiration and fine needle biopsy have become an indispensable tool for the diagnosis of lesions within the gastrointestinal tract and surrounding organs.It has proved to be an effective diagnostic method with high accuracy and low complication rates.Several factors can influence the accuracy and the diagnostic yield of this procedure including experience of the endosonographer,availability of onsite cytopathology services,the method of cytopathology preparation,the location and physical characteristics of the lesion,sampling techniques and the type and size of the needle used.In this review we will outline the recent studies evaluating EUS-guided tissue acquisition and will provide practical recommendations to maximize tissue yield.

US-FNAC联合BRAFV600E基因突变检测对甲状腺结节良恶性诊断效能的影响

目的探讨超声引导下细针穿刺细胞学(US-FNAC)联合BRAFV600E基因检测对甲状腺结节良恶性诊断效能的影响。方法回顾性分析该院2021年10月至2022年12月160例甲状腺影像报告数据系统(TI-RADS)4类甲状腺结节患者,术前均行甲状腺US-FNAC检查及BRAFV600E基因检测,并进行术后组织病理结果对比。依据Bethesda报告系统对甲状腺结节进行分类,荧光定量聚合酶链反应检测BRAFV600E基因突变情况,分析上述两者方法分别单独检测及联合检测诊断甲状腺乳头状癌(PTC)的灵敏度、特异度、准确性、阳性预测值及阴性预测值。结果160例TI-RADS 4类甲状腺结节患者中,US-FNAC结果显示22例为良性,20例为意义不明确的细胞非典型病变,118例为可疑乳头状癌细胞,US-FNAC诊断的灵敏度、特异度和准确度分别为99.11%、75.00%、94.29%,阳性预测值为94.07%,阴性预测值为95.45%;112例发生BRAFV600E基因突变,BRAFV600E基因突变检测的灵敏度、特异度和准确度分别为89.29%、92.86%、90.00%,阳性预测值为98.04%,阴性预测值为68.42%。US-FNAC联合BRAFV600E基因突变检测的灵敏度、特异度和准确度分别为100.00%、67.86%、93.57%,阳性预测值为92.56%,阴性预测值为100.00%。术后组织病理学结果对比,BRAFV600E基因突变检测可鉴别诊断出US-FNAC结果中20例意义不明确的细胞非典型病变类型,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论US-FNAC联合BRAFV600E基因突变检测可提高术前甲状腺结节良恶性的诊断灵敏度,尤其是对于US-FNAC诊断为意义不明确的细胞非典型病变病例有较高临床价值。

超声引导下FNAC联合FNA-Tg检测对甲状腺乳头状癌颈侧区的转移性淋巴结的诊断价值

目的分析超声引导下进行细针穿刺细胞学(FNAC)检查联合洗脱液甲状腺球蛋白(FNA-Tg)检测对甲状腺乳头状癌(PTC)发生颈侧区的转移性淋巴结(MLN)的诊断价值,以期为临床早期筛查诊断提供方案。方法选取2022年1月至2022年12月河南宏力医院就诊的128例PTC且超声检查疑似发生颈侧区的MLN患者作为研究对象,入院后均行FNAC检查及FNA-Tg检测,分析PTC患者发生颈侧区的MLN的超声特征。以病理诊断结果为“金标准”,比较FNAC、FNA-Tg单独检测及联合检测诊断PTC患者发生颈侧区的MLN的价值。结果病理诊断结果显示,阳性92例,阴性36例;FNAC检查诊断结果显示,阳性81例,阴性47例,FNA-Tg检测诊断结果显示,阳性78例,阴性50例,FNAC与FNA-Tg联合诊断结果显示,阳性91例,阴性37例;FNAC与FNA-Tg联合诊断的灵敏度为95.65%、准确度为94.53%,高于FNAC单独诊断的84.78%、86.72%和FNA-Tg单独诊断的82.61%、85.94%,漏诊率为4.35%,低于FNAC单独诊断的15.22%和FNA-Tg单独诊断的17.39%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);FNAC与FNA-Tg联合检测Ⅱ区淋巴结转移检出率为100%,高于FNAC单独检测的72.22%和FNA-Tg单独检测的72.22%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论FNAC与FNA-Tg联合检测可显著提升PTC颈侧区域的MLN诊断准确率和敏感度,降低漏诊率,为临床早期筛查诊断、制定治疗方案提供依据。

甲状腺乳头状癌术前FNAC和术后石蜡组织BRAF V600E检测应用比较

目的 探讨甲状腺乳头状癌术前细针穿刺细胞学(fine-needle aspiration cytology, FNAC)和术后石蜡组织BRAF V600E突变检测的差异及应用价值。方法 应用免疫组化和qRT-PCR检测143例甲状腺乳头状癌石蜡标本BRAF V600E突变,以测序为金标准,比较两种技术检测BRAF V600E的差异。回顾分析265例甲状腺乳头状癌术前FNAC和术后石蜡组织采用qRT-PCR检测BRAF V600E,比较同一组织不同获取方式对BRAF V600E突变检出率的影响。结果 143例甲状腺乳头状癌石蜡标本检测BRAF V600E,免疫组化特异度为85.45%(47/55)、阳性预测值为91.67%(88/96)、准确率为94.41%(135/143)、假阳性率为14.55%(8/55)。qRT-PCR特异度为98.19%(54/55)、阳性预测值为98.88%(88/89)、准确率为99.30%(142/143)、假阳性率为1.8%(1/55)。经配对χ2检验,比较两种方法检测的差异,其特异度、阳性预测值、准确率、假阳性率差异有显著性(P<0.000 01)。另外,265例甲状腺乳头状癌患者术前FNAC BRAF V600E突变检出率为69.81%(185/265),术后石蜡组织BRAF V600E突变检出率为76.98%(204/265)。经配对χ2检验,术前FNAC和术后石蜡组织BRAF V600E突变检出率差异有统计学意义(P<0.000 01)。结论 甲状腺乳头状癌采用qRT-PCR检测BRAF V600E突变优于免疫组化;术后石蜡组织BRAF V600E突变检出率明显高于术前FNAC标本,甲状腺乳头状癌术前FNAC检测BRAF V600E阴性的病例,建议术后石蜡组织复检BRAF V600E突变状态。

US-FNAC联合BRAF V600E基因突变对ACR TI-RADS 5类甲状腺结节的诊断价值

目的探讨超声引导下细针穿刺细胞学(US-FNAC)检查联合BRAF V600E基因突变检测鉴别诊断ACR TI-RADS 5类甲状腺结节良恶性的价值。方法选取依据ACR TI-RADS分类标准,经超声检查诊断为5类、术前行US-FNAC和BRAF V600E突变基因检测的96例甲状腺结节患者,对照术后病理诊断,比较US-FNAC和BRAF V600E突变单独应用及联合检测对结节良恶性的诊断价值。结果96个结节术后病理为良性18个,恶性78个(均为乳头状癌)。US-FNAC和BRAF V600E突变诊断的灵敏度分别为84.6%、89.7%,特异度分别为88.9%、83.3%,阳性预测值分别为97.1%、95.9%,阴性预测值分别为57.1%、65.2%,准确率分别为85.4%、88.5%,与术后组织病理诊断一致性均一般(kappa值分别为0.606、0.660),两者联合诊断与病理诊断一致性较好(kappa值为0.786)。US-FNAC和BRAF V600E突变联合诊断的灵敏度、特异度、阳性预测值、阴性预测值、准确率分别为97.4%、77.8%、95.0%、87.5%、93.8%,联合诊断的灵敏度、准确率、阴性预测值均显著提高;McNemar检验结果显示:US-FNAC、BRAF V600E突变与两者联合诊断差异均有统计学意义(P<0.001,P=0.016)。结论US-FNAC和BRAF V600E突变联合检测可显著提高ACR TI-RADS 5类结节良恶性诊断的灵敏度和准确率,为临床术前评估提供可靠的分子学依据。

超声、RTE及FNAC对非特殊型浸润性乳腺癌病人腋窝淋巴结状态的诊断价值

目的:探讨超声(US)、实时组织弹性成像(RTE)及细针穿刺抽吸细胞学(FNAC)诊断非特殊型浸润性乳腺癌(IBC-NST)病人腋窝淋巴结(ALN)状态的价值。方法:共纳入96例女性IBC-NST病人的107个腋窝淋巴结(ALNs),每个淋巴结均行US、RTE和FNAC检查。分别根据目标淋巴结的二维声像图特征对其打分;根据淋巴结弹性图颜色分布情况,以表示弹性硬度较高的红色和黄色占百分比率定义1~4分共4组弹性模式图,根据不同RTE弹性图对其打分;对以上2种评分相加。最终以FNAC或组织病理结果为诊断金标准,构建3种方法的受试者工作特性曲线(ROC),分别计算3种方法诊断的评分界值、曲线下面积(AUC)以及诊断效能。结果:US、RTE、US联合RTE及FNAC诊断IBC-NST病人ALN状态的敏感性和特异性分别为74.6%、77.3%;76.2%、86.4%;88.9%、79.5%以及88.9%、100%。US、RTE及二者联合诊断方法的AUC分别为0.814、0.844和0.915。结论:US和RTE技术对IBC-NST病人的ALN状态显示了较好的诊断价值,二者联合诊断更具优势。FNAC诊断效能最高,但仍有部分假阴性率。

Is there a difference between 19G core biopsy needle and 22G core biopsy needle in diagnosing the correct etiology?——A meta-analysis and systematic review

AIM To compare the accuracy of endoscopic ultra-sonography(EUS) 19 G core biopsies and 22 G core biopsies in diagnosing the correct etiology for a solid mass.METHODS Articles were searched in Medline, Pub Med, and Ovid journals. Pooling was conducted by both fixed and random effects models. RESULTS Initial search identified 4460 reference articles for 19 G and 22 G, of these 670 relevant articles were selected and reviewed. Data was extracted from 6 studies for 19G(n = 289) and 16 studies for 22G(n = 592) which met the inclusion criteria. EUS 19 G core biopsies had a pooled sensitivity of 91.6%(95%CI: 87.1-95.0) and pooled specificity of 95.9%(95%CI: 88.6-99.2), whereas EUS 22 G had a pooled sensitivity of 83.3%(95%CI: 79.7-86.6) and pooled specificity of 64.3%(95%CI: 54.7-73.1). The positive likelihood ratio of EUS 19 G core biopsies was 9.08(95%CI: 1.12-73.66) and EUS 22 G core biopsies was 1.99(95%CI: 1.09-3.66).The negative likelihood ratio of EUS 19 G core biopsies was 0.12(95%CI: 0.07-0.24) and EUS 22 G core biopsies was 0.25(95%CI: 0.14-0.41). The diagnostic odds ratio was 84.74(95%CI: 18.31-392.26) for 19 G core biopsies and 10.55(95% CI: 3.29-33.87) for 22 G needles. CONCLUSION EUS 19 G core biopsies have an excellent diagnostic value and seem to be better than EUS 22 G biopsies in detecting the correct etiology for a solid mass.