Endoscopic ultrasound‐guided fine‐needle aspiration for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses: the impact on patient‐management strategy

• Published in: Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics 2009-11, Vol.30 (10), p.1070-1077
• Main Authors: TOUCHEFEU, Y., LE RHUN, M., CORON, E., ALAMDARI, A., HEYMANN, M. F., MOSNIER, J. F., MATYSIAK, T., GALMICHE, J. P.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Biological and medical sciences; Biopsy, Fine-Needle; Diagnostic Errors; Digestive system; Endoscopy; Gastroenterology. Liver. Pancreas. Abdomen; Humans; Medical sciences; Middle Aged; Pancreas - diagnostic imaging; Pancreas - pathology; Pancreatic Neoplasms - diagnosis; Pancreatic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging; Pancreatic Neoplasms - pathology; Pharmacology. Drug treatments; Sensitivity and Specificity; Ultrasonography
• ISSN: 0269-2813; 1365-2036
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2036.2009.04138.x

Summary Background  Endoscopic ultrasound‐guided fine‐needle aspiration (EUS‐FNA) is a safe and accurate technique for diagnosing pancreatic cancer. However, its impact for management of these patients is poorly investigated. Aims  To investigate the diagnostic yield and the therapeutic impact of EUS‐FNA in the management of solid pancreatic masses. Methods  One hundred consecutive patients who underwent EUS‐FNA for a solid pancreatic mass were included. Aspirates were placed onto glass slides for cytological examination and microbiopsies were fixed in formaldehyde for histology. The impact on clinical management was analysed retrospectively according to different endpoints, such as its impact on indications for chemotherapy, surgery or appropriate follow‐up modality. Results  Eight procedures were considered failures and two patients were lost to follow‐up. A final diagnosis was obtained in 90 patients. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of combined cytology and histology for the diagnosis of malignant or potentially‐malignant tumours were 78%, 75%, and 78% respectively. The sensitivity and accuracy of cytology alone were significantly higher than those of histology alone (P = 0.0003). By intention‐to‐diagnose analysis, EUS‐FNA directly influenced the management strategy in 62 of 100 patients. Conclusions  In patients with pancreatic mass and suspected malignancy, EUS‐FNA provides an accurate diagnosis in approximately 80% of cases. EUS‐FNA directly influences the management in two‐thirds of patients.