Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Gastrointest Endosc. 2011 Jan;73(1):71-8. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2010.08.050. Epub 2010 Nov 9.

Role of EUS for preoperative evaluation of cholangiocarcinoma: a large single-center experience.

Author information

  • 1Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana 46202, USA.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Accurate preoperative diagnosis and staging of cholangiocarcinoma (CCA) remain difficult.

OBJECTIVE:

To evaluate the utility of EUS in the diagnosis and preoperative evaluation of CCA.

DESIGN:

Observational study of prospectively collected data.

SETTING:

Single tertiary referral hospital in Indianapolis, Indiana.

PATIENTS:

Consecutive patients with CCA from January 2003 through October 2009.

INTERVENTIONS:

EUS and EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS:

Sensitivity of EUS for the detection of a tumor and prediction of unresectability compared with CT and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); sensitivity of EUS-FNA to provide tissue diagnosis, by using surgical pathology as a reference standard.

RESULTS:

A total of 228 patients with biliary strictures undergoing EUS were identified. Of these, 81 (mean age 70 years, 45 men) had CCA. Fifty-one patients (63%) had distal and 30 (37%) had proximal CCA. For those with available imaging, tumor detection was superior with EUS compared with triphasic CT (76 of 81 [94%] vs 23 of 75 [30%], respectively; P < .001). MRI identified the tumor in 11 of 26 patients (42%; P = .07 vs EUS). EUS identified CCA in all 51 (100%) distal and 25 (83%) of 30 proximal tumors (P < .01). EUS-FNA (median, 5 passes; range, 1-12 passes) was performed in 74 patients (91%). The overall sensitivity of EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of CCA was 73% (95% confidence interval, 62%-82%) and was significantly higher in distal compared with proximal CCA (81% vs 59%, respectively; P = .04). Fifteen tumors were definitely unresectable. EUS correctly identified unresectability in 8 of 15 and correctly identified the 38 of 39 patients with resectable tumors (53% sensitivity and 97% specificity for unresectability). CT and/or MRI failed to detect unresectability in 6 of these 8 patients.

LIMITATION:

Single-center study.

CONCLUSION:

EUS and EUS-FNA are sensitive for the diagnosis of CCA and very specific in predicting unresectability. The sensitivity of EUS-FNA is significantly higher in distal than in proximal CCA.

Copyright © 2011 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk