Unknown

Dataset Information

0

High clinical impact and diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided biopsy sampling of subepithelial lesions: a prospective, comparative study.


ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:In a tertiary center setting we aimed to study the diagnostic accuracy and clinical impact of EUS-guided biopsy sampling (EUS-FNB) with a reverse bevel needle compared with that of fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in the work-up of subepithelial lesions (SEL). METHODS:All patients presenting with SELs referred for EUS-guided sampling were prospectively included in 2012-2015. After randomization of the first pass modality, dual sampling with both EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA was performed in each lesion. Outcome measures in an intention-to-diagnose analysis were the diagnostic accuracy, technical failures, and adverse events. The clinical impact was measured as the performance of additional diagnostic procedures post-EUS and the rate of unwarranted resections compared with a reference cohort of SELs sampled in the same institution 2006-2011. RESULTS:In 70 dual sampling procedures of unique lesions (size: 6-220 mm) the diagnostic sensitivity for malignancy and the overall accuracy of EUS-FNB was superior to EUS-FNA compared head-to-head (90 vs 52%, and 83 vs 49%, both p < 0.001). The adverse event rate of EUS-FNB was low (1.2%). EUS-FNB in 2012-2015 had a positive clinical impact in comparison with the reference cohort demonstrated by less cases referred for an additional diagnostic procedure, 12/83 (14%) vs 39/73 (53%), p < 0.001, and fewer unwarranted resections in cases subjected to surgery, 3/48 (6%) vs 12/35 (34%), p = 0.001. CONCLUSIONS:EUS-FNB with a reverse bevel needle is safe and superior to EUS-FNA in providing a conclusive diagnosis of subepithelial lesions. This biopsy sampling approach facilitates a rational clinical management and accurate treatment.

SUBMITTER: Hedenstrom P 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5807503 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

altmetric image

Publications

High clinical impact and diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided biopsy sampling of subepithelial lesions: a prospective, comparative study.

Hedenström Per P   Marschall Hanns-Ulrich HU   Nilsson Bengt B   Demir Akif A   Lindkvist Björn B   Nilsson Ola O   Sadik Riadh R  

Surgical endoscopy 20170815 3


<h4>Background</h4>In a tertiary center setting we aimed to study the diagnostic accuracy and clinical impact of EUS-guided biopsy sampling (EUS-FNB) with a reverse bevel needle compared with that of fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in the work-up of subepithelial lesions (SEL).<h4>Methods</h4>All patients presenting with SELs referred for EUS-guided sampling were prospectively included in 2012-2015. After randomization of the first pass modality, dual sampling with both EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA was  ...[more]

Similar Datasets

| S-EPMC7340004 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC5542816 | biostudies-other
| S-EPMC5803003 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6194594 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7125392 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC6731357 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7430907 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC8542287 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7164999 | biostudies-literature
| S-EPMC7035036 | biostudies-literature