4.4 Article

Conventional versus contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration for diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: A prospective randomized trial

Journal

PANCREATOLOGY
Volume 15, Issue 5, Pages 538-541

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2015.06.005

Keywords

Contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography; Contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic; ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration; Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration; Solid pancreatic lesion; Pancreatic cancer

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: Contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography (CEH-EUS) has been used to diagnose solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs). The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of CEH-EUSguided fine-needle aspiration (CEH-EUS-FNA) compared with that of conventional EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of SPLs. Methods: Forty patients with solid pancreatic lesions who visited Fukushima Medical University between September 2013 and June 2014 were recruited for this prospective study. Twenty patients underwent CEH-EUS-FNA, and 20 patients underwent conventional EUS-FNA. The sampling rate, sensitivity, accuracy, and number of needle passes required to obtain sufficient samples were compared between the two groups. Results: Patient characteristics, sampling rate, accuracy, and sensitivity were not significantly different between the two groups. The final diagnosis of patients who underwent CEH-EUS-FNA was pancreatic cancer in 19 and intraductal papillary mucinous carcinoma in one. Nineteen patients who underwent conventional EUS-FNA were finally diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and one was diagnosed as cancer of the common bile duct. There was a significant difference in the number of needle passes required. A sufficient sample was obtained on one needle pass in 60% (12/20) of CEH-EUS-FNA group compared with 25% (5/20) of the conventional EUS-FNA group. Conclusions: Fewer needle passes were required to obtain samples from solid pancreatic lesions using CEH-EUS-FNA than those required using conventional EUS-FNA. Therefore, CEH-EUS-FNA may be more efficient and safer than conventional EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions. Copyright (C) 2015, IAP and EPC. Published by Elsevier India, a division of Reed Elsevier India Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available