These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy using linear array and radial scanning endosonography.
    Author: Gress FG, Hawes RH, Savides TJ, Ikenberry SO, Lehman GA.
    Journal: Gastrointest Endosc; 1997 Mar; 45(3):243-50. PubMed ID: 9087830.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) accurately stages gastrointestinal malignancies but is less able to differentiate between neoplastic and inflammatory processes. EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS FNA) has been reported useful for obtaining a diagnosis in suspected gastrointestinal lesions. We report our entire experience with EUS FNA using both radial and linear array endosonography, including our diagnostic accuracy and complication rate. METHODS: Two hundred eight consecutive patients (119 men, 89 women) referred for EUS evaluation of suspected gastrointestinal or mediastinal masses underwent EUS-guided FNA. We performed EUS FNA using radial scanning or linear array endosonography and a 23 gauge, 4 cm needle or a 22 gauge, 12 cm needle. Data collected included lesion types, number of passes, complications, and diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: Two hundred eight lesions were targeted, with a total of 705 FNA passes (mean 3.39 passes/patient). Overall diagnostic accuracy for our study population was 87% with a 89% sensitivity and 100% specificity. The diagnostic accuracy for each subgroup was 95% for mediastinal lymph node, 85% for intra-abdominal lymph node, 85% for pancreatic, 84% for submucosal, and 100% for perirectal masses. EUS FNA provided an adequate specimen in 90% of patients. The FNA results were similar for both types of endosonography. We observed immediate complications in 2% (4 of 208) of patients. All complications occurred with EUS FNA of pancreatic lesions and consisted of bleeding and pancreatitis in 2 patients each. For EUS FNA of pancreatic masses there was a 1.2% (2 of 121) risk of pancreatitis, 1% (1/121) risk of severe bleeding, and risk of death in less than 1%. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided FNA appears to be technically feasible, safe, and accurate for obtaining diagnostic tissue of suspicious gastrointestinal and mediastinal lesions and provides important preoperative information.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]