{"title":"影响 EUS 引导下组织采集诊断胰腺实体病变的诊断准确性和样本充分性的因素","authors":"Liqi Sun, Yuqiong Li, Qiuyue Song, Lisi Peng, Ying Xing, Hao Huang, Zhendong Jin","doi":"10.1097/eus.0000000000000060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) is the preferred method to acquire pancreatic cancer (PC) tissues. The factors associated with false-negative outcomes and inadequate samples should be explored to gain an understanding of EUS-TA.\n \n \n \n The patients who underwent EUS-TA for suspected solid PC but whose results were false-negative were analyzed. The PC patients who underwent EUS-TA with true-positive results on the first day of every month during the study period were selected as the control group. The factors influencing diagnostic accuracy and sample adequacy were explored.\n \n \n \n From November 2017 to January 2022, 184 patients were included in the false-negative group, and 175 patients were included in the control group. Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that the recent acute pancreatitis [odds ratio (OR): 0.478, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.250–0.914, P = 0.026] and high echo component within the tumor (OR: 0.103, 95% CI: 0.027–0.400, P = 0.001) were independently associated with false-negative EUS-TA results. Meanwhile, using fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles (OR: 2.270, 95% CI: 1.277–4.035, P = 0.005), more needle passes (OR: 1.651,95% CI: 1.239–2.199, P = 0.005), large tumor size (OR: 1.053, 95% CI: 1.029–1.077, P < 0.001), and high CA-19-9 level (OR: 1.001, 95% CI: 1.000–1.001, P = 0.019) were independently associated with true-positive EUS-TA outcomes. Three needle passes are needed to achieve optimal EUS-TA outcomes. Tumor location in the body/tail (OR: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.01–1.72; P = 0.04), needle passes ≥3 (OR: 1.90; 95% CI: 1.22–2.56; P < 0.001), and using the FNB needle (OR: 2.10; 95%: 1.48–2.85; P < 0.001) were independently related to sample adequacy.\n \n \n \n Numerous factors were identified to be associated with the diagnostic accuracy and sample adequacy of EUS-TA.\n","PeriodicalId":11577,"journal":{"name":"Endoscopic Ultrasound","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The factors that influence the diagnostic accuracy and sample adequacy of EUS-guided tissue acquisition for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions\",\"authors\":\"Liqi Sun, Yuqiong Li, Qiuyue Song, Lisi Peng, Ying Xing, Hao Huang, Zhendong Jin\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/eus.0000000000000060\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n \\n EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) is the preferred method to acquire pancreatic cancer (PC) tissues. The factors associated with false-negative outcomes and inadequate samples should be explored to gain an understanding of EUS-TA.\\n \\n \\n \\n The patients who underwent EUS-TA for suspected solid PC but whose results were false-negative were analyzed. The PC patients who underwent EUS-TA with true-positive results on the first day of every month during the study period were selected as the control group. The factors influencing diagnostic accuracy and sample adequacy were explored.\\n \\n \\n \\n From November 2017 to January 2022, 184 patients were included in the false-negative group, and 175 patients were included in the control group. Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that the recent acute pancreatitis [odds ratio (OR): 0.478, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.250–0.914, P = 0.026] and high echo component within the tumor (OR: 0.103, 95% CI: 0.027–0.400, P = 0.001) were independently associated with false-negative EUS-TA results. Meanwhile, using fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles (OR: 2.270, 95% CI: 1.277–4.035, P = 0.005), more needle passes (OR: 1.651,95% CI: 1.239–2.199, P = 0.005), large tumor size (OR: 1.053, 95% CI: 1.029–1.077, P < 0.001), and high CA-19-9 level (OR: 1.001, 95% CI: 1.000–1.001, P = 0.019) were independently associated with true-positive EUS-TA outcomes. Three needle passes are needed to achieve optimal EUS-TA outcomes. Tumor location in the body/tail (OR: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.01–1.72; P = 0.04), needle passes ≥3 (OR: 1.90; 95% CI: 1.22–2.56; P < 0.001), and using the FNB needle (OR: 2.10; 95%: 1.48–2.85; P < 0.001) were independently related to sample adequacy.\\n \\n \\n \\n Numerous factors were identified to be associated with the diagnostic accuracy and sample adequacy of EUS-TA.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":11577,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Endoscopic Ultrasound\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Endoscopic Ultrasound\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/eus.0000000000000060\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Endoscopic Ultrasound","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/eus.0000000000000060","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The factors that influence the diagnostic accuracy and sample adequacy of EUS-guided tissue acquisition for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions
EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) is the preferred method to acquire pancreatic cancer (PC) tissues. The factors associated with false-negative outcomes and inadequate samples should be explored to gain an understanding of EUS-TA.
The patients who underwent EUS-TA for suspected solid PC but whose results were false-negative were analyzed. The PC patients who underwent EUS-TA with true-positive results on the first day of every month during the study period were selected as the control group. The factors influencing diagnostic accuracy and sample adequacy were explored.
From November 2017 to January 2022, 184 patients were included in the false-negative group, and 175 patients were included in the control group. Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that the recent acute pancreatitis [odds ratio (OR): 0.478, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.250–0.914, P = 0.026] and high echo component within the tumor (OR: 0.103, 95% CI: 0.027–0.400, P = 0.001) were independently associated with false-negative EUS-TA results. Meanwhile, using fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles (OR: 2.270, 95% CI: 1.277–4.035, P = 0.005), more needle passes (OR: 1.651,95% CI: 1.239–2.199, P = 0.005), large tumor size (OR: 1.053, 95% CI: 1.029–1.077, P < 0.001), and high CA-19-9 level (OR: 1.001, 95% CI: 1.000–1.001, P = 0.019) were independently associated with true-positive EUS-TA outcomes. Three needle passes are needed to achieve optimal EUS-TA outcomes. Tumor location in the body/tail (OR: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.01–1.72; P = 0.04), needle passes ≥3 (OR: 1.90; 95% CI: 1.22–2.56; P < 0.001), and using the FNB needle (OR: 2.10; 95%: 1.48–2.85; P < 0.001) were independently related to sample adequacy.
Numerous factors were identified to be associated with the diagnostic accuracy and sample adequacy of EUS-TA.
期刊介绍:
Endoscopic Ultrasound, a publication of Euro-EUS Scientific Committee, Asia-Pacific EUS Task Force and Latin American Chapter of EUS, is a peer-reviewed online journal with Quarterly print on demand compilation of issues published. The journal’s full text is available online at http://www.eusjournal.com. The journal allows free access (Open Access) to its contents and permits authors to self-archive final accepted version of the articles on any OAI-compliant institutional / subject-based repository. The journal does not charge for submission, processing or publication of manuscripts and even for color reproduction of photographs.