摘要
Background: Early detection of small solid pancreatic lesions is increasingly common. To date, few and contradictory data have been published about the relationship between lesion size and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration(EUS-FNA) diagnostic yield. The aim of this study was to assess the relation between the size of solid pancreatic lesions and the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA using a 25-gauge needle in a center without available rapid on-site evaluation.Methods: In the retrospective cohort study, we selected patients who underwent EUS-FNA for solid pancreatic lesions with a 25-gauge needle from October 2014 to October 2015. Patients were divided into three groups(≤15 mm, 16–25 mm and >25 mm), and the outcomes were compared.Results: We analyzed 163 patients. Overall adequacy, sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were 85.2%,81.8%, 93.7%, and 80.4%, respectively. When stratified by size, the sensitivity and accuracy correlated with size(P = 0.016 and P = 0.042, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that lesion size was the only independent factor(P = 0.019, OR = 4.76) affecting accuracy. The role of size as an independent factor affecting accuracy was confirmed in a separate multivariate analysis, where size was included in the model as a covariate(P = 0.018, OR = 1.08).Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that, in the absence of rapid on-site evaluation, mass size affects the accuracy of EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic lesions.
Background: Early detection of small solid pancreatic lesions is increasingly common. To date, few and contradictory data have been published about the relationship between lesion size and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration(EUS-FNA) diagnostic yield. The aim of this study was to assess the relation between the size of solid pancreatic lesions and the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA using a 25-gauge needle in a center without available rapid on-site evaluation.Methods: In the retrospective cohort study, we selected patients who underwent EUS-FNA for solid pancreatic lesions with a 25-gauge needle from October 2014 to October 2015. Patients were divided into three groups(≤15 mm, 16–25 mm and >25 mm), and the outcomes were compared.Results: We analyzed 163 patients. Overall adequacy, sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were 85.2%,81.8%, 93.7%, and 80.4%, respectively. When stratified by size, the sensitivity and accuracy correlated with size(P = 0.016 and P = 0.042, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that lesion size was the only independent factor(P = 0.019, OR = 4.76) affecting accuracy. The role of size as an independent factor affecting accuracy was confirmed in a separate multivariate analysis, where size was included in the model as a covariate(P = 0.018, OR = 1.08).Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that, in the absence of rapid on-site evaluation, mass size affects the accuracy of EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic lesions.
