Suppr超能文献

比较细胞病理学家指导与7次穿刺用于胰腺肿块超声内镜细针穿刺活检诊断率的随机非劣效性试验

Randomized Noninferiority Trial Comparing Diagnostic Yield of Cytopathologist-guided versus 7 passes for EUS-FNA of Pancreatic Masses.

作者信息

Lee Linda S, Nieto Jose, Watson Rabindra R, Hwang Allen L, Muthusamy Venkatara R, Walter Laura, Jajoo Kunal, Ryou Marvin K, Saltzman John R, Saunders Michael D, Suleiman Shadeah, Kadiyala Vivek

机构信息

Division of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Endoscopy, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.

Borland-Groover Clinic, Jacksonville, FL.

出版信息

Dig Endosc. 2016 May;28(4):469-475. doi: 10.1111/den.12594. Epub 2015 Dec 23.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM

To improve diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in solid pancreatic lesions, on-site cytology review has been recommended. Because this is not widely available throughout the world, the aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA performed with rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) versus 7 FNA passes without ROSE in pancreatic masses.

METHODS

In this multicenter randomized noninferiority trial, patients were randomized to ROSE versus 7 passes into a solid pancreatic mass. On the basis of the absolute difference in diagnostic yield with 7 passes versus cytopathologist-guidance, the noninferiority margin for the difference in diagnostic yield was defined as -15%. Definite diagnosis was defined to include positive for malignancy, neoplastic cells present, and negative for malignancy.

RESULTS

A total of 142 patients were randomized with 73 in the cytopathologist arm and 69 in the 7 passes arm. Diagnostic yield for definite diagnosis was 78.3% with 7 passes and 78.1% with cytopathology guidance. With an absolute difference 0.2%, 95% CI -14.4 to 14.6, performing 7 passes was noninferior to cytopathologist-guided EUS-FNA. There was no significant difference in complications or time to perform FNA. A median of 5 passes were performed with ROSE. The median charge with onsite cytopathology was significantly greater than performing 7 passes [$1058 (958, 1445) versus $375 (275, 460), p<0.001].

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnostic yield for performing 7 passes during EUS-FNA into solid pancreatic masses is noninferior with lower charge compared to cytopathologist-guidance. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

摘要

背景与目的

为提高内镜超声引导下细针穿刺活检(EUS-FNA)对胰腺实性病变的诊断率,推荐进行现场细胞学检查。由于该项检查在全球范围内尚未广泛普及,本研究旨在比较在胰腺肿块中采用快速现场评估(ROSE)的EUS-FNA与未采用ROSE的7次FNA穿刺活检的诊断率。

方法

在这项多中心随机非劣效性试验中,患者被随机分为ROSE组和7次穿刺组,对胰腺实性肿块进行穿刺。根据7次穿刺与细胞病理学家指导下的诊断率绝对差异,将诊断率差异的非劣效界值定义为-15%。明确诊断定义为包括恶性阳性、存在肿瘤细胞以及恶性阴性。

结果

共有142例患者被随机分组,细胞病理学家指导组73例,7次穿刺组69例。7次穿刺的明确诊断率为78.3%,细胞病理学指导下为78.1%。绝对差异为0.2%,95%可信区间为-14.4至14.6,进行7次穿刺并不劣于细胞病理学家指导下的EUS-FNA。并发症或FNA操作时间无显著差异。ROSE组的穿刺中位数为5次。现场细胞病理学检查的中位数费用显著高于进行7次穿刺的费用[1058美元(958,1445)对375美元(275,460),p<0.001]。

结论

在EUS-FNA对胰腺实性肿块进行7次穿刺活检的诊断率与细胞病理学家指导下相当,但费用更低。本文受版权保护。保留所有权利。

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