4.6 Article

Accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound elastography used for differential diagnosis of focal pancreatic masses: a multicenter study

Journal

ENDOSCOPY
Volume 43, Issue 7, Pages 596-603

Publisher

GEORG THIEME VERLAG KG
DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1256314

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and study aims: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) elastography represents a new imaging procedure that might characterize the differences of hardness and strain between diseased tissue and normal tissue. The aim of this study was to assess the efficiency of EUS elastography for the differentiation of focal masses in chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer. Patients and methods: The study group comprised 258 patients with focal pancreatic masses included prospectively at 13 participating centers. Qualitative analysis of the diagnoses made by two expert doctors using all recorded video clips was performed in order to test the interobserver variability. A post-processing software analysis was used to examine the EUS elastography videos by calculating average-hue histograms of individual elastography images. The quantitative information was used to calculate intra-observer variability and the accuracy of the method. Results: Qualitative analysis of the recorded videos revealed a kappa value of 0.72. Intra-observer variability analysis revealed that the single measure intraclass correlation ranged between 0.86 and 0.94. The average-hue histogram analysis of the data indicated a sensitivity of 93.4 %, a specificity of 66.0 %, a positive predictive value of 92.5 %, a negative predictive value of 68.9 %, and an overall accuracy of 85.4 %, based on a cut-off value of 175. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) was 0.854 (P < 0.0001) with a confidence interval of 0.804-0.894. Conclusion: The value of quantitative analysis of EUS elastography recordings was proven by good reproducibility of the videos, as well as good parameters of the AUROC analysis. (Clinical Trials.gov identifier: CT00909103).

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available