Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 1997 May;45(5):387-93.
doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(97)70149-4.

The clinical utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic carcinoma

Affiliations

The clinical utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic carcinoma

K J Chang et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 1997 May.

Abstract

Background: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) of pancreatic lesions is being increasingly used. Our aim was to determine the safety, accuracy, and clinical utility of EUS-guided FNA in both the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancer.

Methods: Forty-four patients (24 men/20 women) had EUS-guided FNA of pancreatic lesions (39 head/neck, 5 body, 3 tail) and/or associated lymph nodes. The mean age was 61 (range, 28 to 88 years). The indication for EUS-guided FNA was a pancreatic lesion seen initially on CT (39%), ERCP (43%), or EUS (18%). Follow-up data were collected on all patients for mean of 14.5 months (range 1 to 33 months).

Results: CT detected only 15 of 61 (25%) focal lesions seen by EUS, Adequate specimens were obtained by EUS-guided FNA in 44 of 47 (94%) pancreatic lesions and 14 of 14 (100%) associated lymph nodes (overall adequacy was 95%). Of the 46 lesions in which specimens were adequate and a final diagnosis was available (32 malignant, 14 benign), EUS-guided FNA had a sensitivity of 92%, specificity of 100%, and diagnostic accuracy of 95% for pancreatic lesions and 83%, 100%, and 88% for lymph nodes, respectively. Six percent of pancreatic cases had inadequate specimens and, if included, lowered the sensitivity to 83%, specificity to 80%, and diagnostic accuracy to 88% for pancreatic lesions. In 3 patients with enlarged celiac nodes on EUS, EUS-guided FNA was able to make a tissue diagnosis of metastasis, which changed the preoperative staging and precluded surgery. EUS in combination with EUS-guided FNA precluded surgery in 12 of 44 (27%) and may have precluded surgery in an additional 6 of 44 (14%). EUS-guided FNA avoided the need for further diagnostic tests, thus expediting therapy in a total of 25 (57%) patients and influenced clinical decisions in 30 of 44 (68%) patients. The estimated cost savings based on surgeries avoided was approximately $3300 per patient. There was only one complication (2%), a post-FNA fever.

Conclusion: EUS-guided FNA of the pancreas appears to be a safe and effective method that increases both the diagnostic and staging capability of EUS in pancreatic cancer. The clinical impact of EUS-guided FNA includes avoiding surgery and additional imaging studies with a substantial cost savings.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources