Background /Aims: We applied a back light system (BLS) with a magnifying glass to improve the ability to assess the adequacy of specimen sampling using endosonography. We conducted this study to evaluate the efficacy of the BLS in sampling of specimens by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of solid pancreatic masses.
Methods This was a prospective, randomized, crossover, single-center clinical trial. An endosonographer evaluated adequacy on gross visual inspection and identified whitish specimen sampling sites with and without the BLS according to a randomization sequence in the first and second passes with a 25-G needle. On cytological evaluation, the presence of well-defined pancreatic ductal epithelium was evaluated by a cytopathologist who was blinded to any clinical information.
Results A total of 80 consecutive patients were eligible during the study period. Adequacy was observed for 52 specimens (65%) with the BLS and 54 (68%) without the BLS (p=0.88). In assessment of specimen adequacy on gross examination, only fair agreement was observed both with and without BLS (kappa score 0.40 and 0.29, respectively).
Conclusions The BLS did not influence the ability to identify specimen sampling sites or reliable assessment of specimen site adequacy using gross visual inspection.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Tissue processing of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration specimens from solid pancreatic lesions Kenji Notohara, Kaori Nakamura Journal of Medical Ultrasonics.2024; 51(2): 261. CrossRef
Unfortunately, a “Back Light System” As a Global Positioning System Failed to Guide the Route in 25-G Fine-Needle Aspiration Rungsun Rerknimitr, Phonthep Angsuwatcharakon Clinical Endoscopy.2019; 52(4): 295. CrossRef
Background /Aims: This study aimed to examine the diagnostic ability of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) for major vascular invasion in pancreatic cancer and to evaluate the relationship between EUS findings and pathological distance.
Methods In total, 57 consecutive patients who underwent EUS for pancreatic cancer before surgery were retrospectively reviewed. EUS image findings were divided into four types according to the relationship between the tumor and major vessel (types 1 and 2: invasion, types 3 and 4: non-invasion). We also compared the EUS findings and pathologically measured distances between the tumors and evaluated vessels.
Results The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of EUS diagnosis for vascular invasion were 89%, 92%, and 91%, respectively, in the veins and 83%, 94%, and 93%, respectively, in the arteries. The pathologically evaluated distances of cases with type 2 EUS findings were significantly shorter than those of cases with type 3 EUS findings in both the major veins (median [interquartile range], 96 [0–742] µm vs. 2,833 [1,076–5,694] µm, p=0.012) and arteries (623 [0–854] µm vs. 3,097 [1,396–6,000] µm, p=0.0061). All cases with a distance of ≥1,000 µm between the tumors and main vessels were correctly diagnosed.
Conclusions Tumors at a distance ≥1,000 µm from the main vessels were correctly diagnosed by EUS.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Staging and Vascular Assessment of Pancreatic Cancer Mohammed A El-Nady, Khalid A Ead, Mustafa A Haridy, Nour Shaheen, Abdulqadir J Nashwan, Saad R Abdelwahid, Mohammed F Mohammed, Omran Mohamed, Safwat S Sawy, Emad Abdelrazzak, Amro M Hassan Cureus.2024;[Epub] CrossRef
The diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound vs. contrast-enhanced computed tomography in local staging of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a bi-national multicenter study Wisam Sbeit, Mahmoud Salman, Abed Khalaileh, Ahmad Zoabi, Zakhar Bramnik, David Hovel, Mahmud Mahamid, Eran Israeli, Lior Katz, Reem Khoury, Nama Mubariki, Andrea Lisotti, Halim Awadie, Tawfik Khoury European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology.2023; 35(9): 974. CrossRef
Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Diagnosis of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Abhirup Chatterjee, Jimil Shah Diagnostics.2023; 14(1): 78. CrossRef
The expanding role of endoscopic ultrasound elastography Jahnvi Dhar, Jayanta Samanta Clinical Journal of Gastroenterology.2022; 15(5): 841. CrossRef
Experience of introduction of endoscopic ultrasonography into daily clinical practice in a surgical hospital A.V. Zhdanov, E.G. Solonitsyn, E.A. Korymasov Endoskopicheskaya khirurgiya.2020; 26(5): 24. CrossRef
Endoscopic Ultrasonography for Vascular Invasion in Pancreatic Cancer Seong-Hun Kim Clinical Endoscopy.2019; 52(5): 397. CrossRef
Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transgastric drainage has been performed as a less invasive procedure for pancreatic fistulas and intra-abdominal abscesses occurring after surgery in recent years. However, there are no reports of EUS-guided transgastric drainage of intra-abdominal abscesses following gastrectomy. This case report describes 2 patients who developed an intra-abdominal abscess following gastrectomy and underwent EUS-guided transgastric drainage. Both patients underwent laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy with Billroth-I reconstruction for gastric cancer. The intra-abdominal abscesses were caused by postoperative pancreatic fistula that developed following gastrectomy. One patient underwent naso-cystic drainage and the other underwent only a needle puncture of the abscess cavity. EUS-guided drainage was performed safely and effectively, although 1 patient developed gastroduodenal anastomotic leakage related to this procedure. In summary, EUS-guided transgastric drainage is safe and technically feasible even in post-gastrectomy patients. However, it is necessary to be careful if this procedure is performed in the early period following gastrectomy.
Citations
Citations to this article as recorded by
A Case of Intra-abdominal Abcess following a Pancreatic Fistula after Gastrectomy Treated with Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Transgastric Drainage Kenichi ISHIBAYASHI, Toshikatsu TSUJI, Daisuke YAMAMOTO, Hirotaka KITAMURA, Shinichi KADOYA, Hiroyuki BANDO Nihon Rinsho Geka Gakkai Zasshi (Journal of Japan Surgical Association).2020; 81(6): 1097. CrossRef