0 340

Cited 20 times in

Comparison of contrast-enhanced versus conventional EUS-guided FNA/fine-needle biopsy in diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: a randomized controlled trial

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.author조재희-
dc.date.accessioned2021-09-29T01:59:08Z-
dc.date.available2021-09-29T01:59:08Z-
dc.date.issued2021-08-
dc.identifier.issn0016-5107-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/184649-
dc.description.abstractBackground and aims: Contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (CEH-EUS) is useful in the differential diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs). However, there is lack of verification about the usefulness of CEH-EUS-guided FNA/fine-needle biopsy (FNB) sampling. This study aimed to investigate the usefulness of CEH-EUS-guided FNA/FNB sampling without on-site cytopathology. Methods: Patients with SPLs were prospectively enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1) to 2 parallel groups, the interventional group (CEH-EUS) or the control group (conventional EUS). The diagnostic sensitivity and optimal number of needle passes for pathologic diagnosis were investigated and compared between groups. Results: Two hundred forty patients were enrolled from March 2016 to September 2019, with 120 patients assigned to each group. Pancreatic malignancies and neuroendocrine tumors were found in 202 (90.83%) and 9 (3.75%) patients, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of age, sex, lesion size (30.96 ± 12.09 mm in the CEH-EUS group vs 33.09 ± 16.39 mm in the conventional EUS group; P = .252), lesion location, adverse event rate, and disease distribution. The diagnostic sensitivity values in the CEH-EUS and conventional EUS groups were 85.8% and 88.3%, respectively (P = .564). All patients in the conventional EUS group and most in the CEH-EUS group received a pathologic diagnosis within 3 needle passes. Conclusions: Diagnostic sensitivity for SPLs was not different between the CEH-EUS and conventional EUS groups, and no independent factors were found that could improve diagnostic sensitivity. CEH-EUS-guided FNA/FNB sampling does not need to be used routinely and may be selectively considered for small, indeterminate lesions. (Clinical trial registration number: KCT 0001840.).-
dc.description.statementOfResponsibilityrestriction-
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.publisherMosby Yearbook-
dc.relation.isPartOfGASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY-
dc.rightsCC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR-
dc.titleComparison of contrast-enhanced versus conventional EUS-guided FNA/fine-needle biopsy in diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: a randomized controlled trial-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.collegeCollege of Medicine (의과대학)-
dc.contributor.departmentDept. of Internal Medicine (내과학교실)-
dc.contributor.googleauthorIn Rae Cho-
dc.contributor.googleauthorSeok-Hoo Jeong-
dc.contributor.googleauthorHuapyong Kang-
dc.contributor.googleauthorEui Joo Kim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorYeon Suk Kim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJae Hee Cho-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.gie.2021.01.018-
dc.contributor.localIdA03902-
dc.relation.journalcodeJ00920-
dc.identifier.eissn1097-6779-
dc.identifier.pmid33497643-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016510721000456-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameCho, Jae Hee-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor조재희-
dc.citation.volume94-
dc.citation.number2-
dc.citation.startPage303-
dc.citation.endPage310-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationGASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, Vol.94(2) : 303-310, 2021-08-
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Internal Medicine (내과학교실) > 1. Journal Papers

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.