4.7 Article

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in the diagnosis and staging of lung cancer and its impact on surgical staging

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 23, 期 33, 页码 8357-8361

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.01.1965

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose The diagnosis and staging of lung cancer critically depends on surgical procedures. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is an accurate, safe, and minimally invasive technique for the analysis of mediastinal lymph nodes (LNs) and can additionally detect tumor invasion (T4) in patients with centrally located tumors. The goal of this study was to assess to what extent EUS-FNA could prevent surgical interventions. Patients and Methods Two hundred forty two consecutive patients with suspected (n = 142) or proven (n = 100) lung cancer and enlarged (> 1 cm) mediastinal LNs at chest computed tomography were scheduled for mediastinoscopy/tomy (94%) or exploratory thoracotomy (6%). Before surgery, all patients underwent EUS-FNA. If EUS-FNA established LN metastases, tumor invasion, or small-cell lung cancer (SCLC), scheduled surgical interventions were cancelled. Surgical-pathologic verification occurred when EUS-FNA did not demonstrate advanced disease. Cancelled surgical interventions because of EUS findings was the primary end point. Results EUS-FNA prevented 70% of scheduled surgical procedures because of the demonstration of LN metastases in non-small-cell lung cancer (52%), tumor invasion (T4) (4%), tumor invasion and LN metastases (5%), SCLC (8%), or benign diagnoses (1%). Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for EUS in mediastinal analysis were 91%, 100% and 93%, respectively. No complications were recorded. Conclusion EUS-FNA qualifies as the initial staging procedure of choice for patients with (suspected) lung cancer and enlarged mediastinal LNs. Implementation of EUS-FNA in staging algorithms for lung cancer might reduce the number of surgical staging procedures considerably.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据