Suppr超能文献

一项比较内镜超声引导下细针抽吸术快速涂片评估与 ThinPrep 的前瞻性研究。

A prospective study comparing rapid assessment of smears and ThinPrep for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspirates.

机构信息

Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Indiana University Medical Center, Indianapolis, Indiana 46202, USA.

出版信息

Endoscopy. 2010 May;42(5):389-94. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1243841. Epub 2010 Jan 25.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

ThinPrep is often used for endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) samples but the sensitivity of this method is unknown. The objective of the study was to compare sensitivity and accuracy of ThinPrep versus the smear method in pancreas and lymph node samples obtained by EUS-FNA.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with suspected malignancy in the pancreas or lymph node underwent EUS-FNA. On-site rapid assessment of all aspirates using the smear method was performed. After rapid assessment, three additional passes from each site were submitted into ThinPrep liquid medium. Cytopathologists interpreting the smear method and ThinPrep slides were blinded to each other. The gold standard was final cytology or pathology results.

RESULTS

A total of 130 patients (36 % women, mean age 63 years) underwent EUS-FNA of 139 sites (50 pancreas, 89 lymph node). Malignancy was confirmed in 47 pancreas samples (94 %) and 48 lymph node samples (54 %). Mean +/- SD number of passes made for the smear method was 2.6 +/- 1.3. For pancreatic cancer, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy of the ThinPrep versus the smear method were: 62 % versus 98 %, 100 % versus 100 %, 100 % versus 100 %, 14 % versus 75 %, and 64 % versus 98 %, respectively. For lymph nodes the values were 67 % versus 92 %, 100 % versus 98 %, 100 % versus 98 %, 72 % versus 72 %, and 82 % versus 94 %, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The smear method is more sensitive and accurate than ThinPrep in detecting malignancy from EUS-FNA samples of the pancreas and lymph nodes. Smear method with on-site rapid assessment should be favored over ThinPrep in suspected malignancy.

摘要

背景和研究目的

液基薄层细胞学检测(ThinPrep)常用于内镜超声引导下细针抽吸术(EUS-FNA)标本,但该方法的敏感性尚不清楚。本研究旨在比较 ThinPrep 与涂片法在 EUS-FNA 胰腺和淋巴结标本中的敏感性和准确性。

患者和方法

怀疑胰腺或淋巴结恶性肿瘤的患者接受 EUS-FNA。现场快速评估所有抽吸物采用涂片法进行。快速评估后,从每个部位再提交 3 个额外的通过 ThinPrep 液体介质。解释涂片法和 ThinPrep 载玻片的细胞病理学家彼此之间是盲法的。金标准是最终的细胞学或病理学结果。

结果

共 130 例(36%为女性,平均年龄 63 岁)患者行 139 个部位(50 个胰腺,89 个淋巴结)EUS-FNA。47 个胰腺样本(94%)和 48 个淋巴结样本(54%)证实为恶性。涂片法的平均 +/- SD 通过次数为 2.6 +/- 1.3。对于胰腺癌,ThinPrep 与涂片法的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)、阴性预测值(NPV)和准确性分别为:62%与 98%、100%与 100%、100%与 100%、14%与 75%和 64%与 98%。对于淋巴结,相应值分别为 67%与 92%、100%与 98%、100%与 98%、72%与 72%和 82%与 94%。

结论

在检测胰腺和淋巴结 EUS-FNA 样本中的恶性肿瘤时,涂片法比 ThinPrep 更敏感和准确。在怀疑恶性肿瘤时,应优先采用现场快速评估的涂片法,而不是 ThinPrep。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验