Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2017 Aug 15;16(4):418-423. doi: 10.1016/S1499-3872(17)60035-3.

Comparison of cytological and histological preparations in the diagnosis of pancreatic malignancies using endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration.

Author information

1
Department of Internal Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Medical Center, Goyang-si, Gyeonggi-do, Korea; Department of Internal Medicine and Liver Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
2
Department of Internal Medicine and Liver Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. Electronic address: gidoctor@snuh.org.
3
Department of Internal Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Medical Center, Goyang-si, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
4
Department of Internal Medicine and Liver Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
5
Department of Internal Medicine, Inje University Ilsan Paik Hospital, Goyang-si, Gyeonggi-do, Korea.
6
Department of Pathology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has become a crucial diagnostic technique for pancreatic malignancies. The specimen obtained by EUS-FNA can be prepared for either cytological or histological examinations. This study was to compare diagnostic performance of cytological and histological preparations using EUS-FNA in the same lesions when pancreatic malignancies were suspected.

METHODS:

One hundred and eighteen patients who underwent EUS-FNA for suspected pancreatic malignancies were consecutively enrolled. All procedures were conducted by a single echoendoscopist under the same conditions. Four adequate preparations were obtained by 22-gauge needles with 20 to-and-fro movements for each pass. The 4 preparations included 2 cytological and 2 histological specimens. The pathologic reviews of all specimens were conducted independently by a single experienced cytopathologist. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the 2 preparations were compared.

RESULTS:

The enrolled patients consisted of 62 males (52.5%), with the mean age of 64.6±10.5 years. Surgery was performed in 23 (19.5%) patients. One hundred and sixteen (98.3%) lesions were classified as malignant, while 2 (1.7%) were benign. Sensitivity of cytology and histology were 87.9% and 81.9%, respectively, with no significant difference (P=0.190). Accuracy was also not significantly different. Cytological preparation was more sensitive when the size of lesion was <3 cm (86.7% vs 68.9%, P=0.033).

CONCLUSIONS:

Our results suggested that the diagnostic performances of cytological and histological preparations are not significantly different for the diagnosis of pancreatic malignancies. However, cytological preparation might be more sensitive for pancreatic lesions <3 cm.

KEYWORDS:

cytology; endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration; histology; pancreatic neoplasms; pathology

PMID:
28823373
DOI:
10.1016/S1499-3872(17)60035-3
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center