Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Diagnostic impact of EUS(b)-FNA in diagnostics of sarcoidosis

View through CrossRef
RATIONALE. Endosonography with fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) became a promising method of choice for sarcoidosis, but still data regarding the contribution of EUS-FNA on final efficacy of endoscopic diagnostics are sparse. METHODS. 45 patients with suspicion for sarcoidosis (stage II) undergone a bronchoscopy with TBLB via right middle lobe, and subsequent EUS-FNA (via esophagus) using Olympus ultrasound bronchoscope with 22G needle. All EUS-FNAs were performed for lymph nodes stations 7 or 4L (3 passes per node and procedure). Diagnostic yield by histology and cytology for FNA and TBLB specimens were analyzed. RESULTS There were no complications for all biopsies. For TBLBs both histology and cytology specimens were obtained, median number of biopsies was 3. Diagnosis was confirmed by TBLB in 31/45 (69%) pts via histology, and in 14/45 pts (31%) by cytology. Cumulative efficacy of TBLB reached 34/45 (78%) pts. EUS-FNA reached an adequate cytology specimens in all cases, histology specimens were obtained only in 2/45 (4%) pts, informative material was received in 38/45 (84%) pts. Two histology specimens also were informative. The whole efficacy of EUS-FNA reached 38/45 (84%) pts. Totally, TBLB and EUS-FNA gave confirmation of disease in 41/45 (91%) pts. Difference between TBLB and EUS-FNA groups for total diagnostic yield (78% and 84% for TBLB and EUS-FNA, respectively; p>0.05) was non-significant, but cytological yield favored EUS-FNA (31% and 84% for TBLB and EUS-FNA, respectively; p<0.05). Endosonography improved diagnostic yield for sarcoidosis on 13%. CONCLUSION. According to our data, endoscopic ultrasound-guided FNA makes substantial contribution in confirmation of disease in sarcoidosis patients.
Title: Diagnostic impact of EUS(b)-FNA in diagnostics of sarcoidosis
Description:
RATIONALE.
Endosonography with fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) became a promising method of choice for sarcoidosis, but still data regarding the contribution of EUS-FNA on final efficacy of endoscopic diagnostics are sparse.
METHODS.
45 patients with suspicion for sarcoidosis (stage II) undergone a bronchoscopy with TBLB via right middle lobe, and subsequent EUS-FNA (via esophagus) using Olympus ultrasound bronchoscope with 22G needle.
All EUS-FNAs were performed for lymph nodes stations 7 or 4L (3 passes per node and procedure).
Diagnostic yield by histology and cytology for FNA and TBLB specimens were analyzed.
RESULTS There were no complications for all biopsies.
For TBLBs both histology and cytology specimens were obtained, median number of biopsies was 3.
Diagnosis was confirmed by TBLB in 31/45 (69%) pts via histology, and in 14/45 pts (31%) by cytology.
Cumulative efficacy of TBLB reached 34/45 (78%) pts.
EUS-FNA reached an adequate cytology specimens in all cases, histology specimens were obtained only in 2/45 (4%) pts, informative material was received in 38/45 (84%) pts.
Two histology specimens also were informative.
The whole efficacy of EUS-FNA reached 38/45 (84%) pts.
Totally, TBLB and EUS-FNA gave confirmation of disease in 41/45 (91%) pts.
Difference between TBLB and EUS-FNA groups for total diagnostic yield (78% and 84% for TBLB and EUS-FNA, respectively; p>0.
05) was non-significant, but cytological yield favored EUS-FNA (31% and 84% for TBLB and EUS-FNA, respectively; p<0.
05).
Endosonography improved diagnostic yield for sarcoidosis on 13%.
CONCLUSION.
According to our data, endoscopic ultrasound-guided FNA makes substantial contribution in confirmation of disease in sarcoidosis patients.

Related Results

Predictors of False-Negative Axillary FNA Among Breast Cancer Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study
Predictors of False-Negative Axillary FNA Among Breast Cancer Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study
Abstract Introduction Fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is commonly used to investigate lymphadenopathy of suspected metastatic origin. The current study aims to find the association be...
925 Incremental Value of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Detecting Pancreatic Lesions in Patients With MEN1
925 Incremental Value of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Detecting Pancreatic Lesions in Patients With MEN1
INTRODUCTION: Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 is an inherited disorder that affects the endocrine glands caused by a mutation in the MEN1 gene. MEN1 is associated w...
The Expansion of the Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in the Field of Endohepatology
The Expansion of the Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in the Field of Endohepatology
Background/Objective: Endohepatology has recently emerged as a field combining advanced endoscopy and hepatology. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) plays a key role in the management of ...
A review of contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography for pancreatic solid tumors
A review of contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography for pancreatic solid tumors
AbstractEndoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is superior to other imaging modalities in the detection of pancreatic masses, although differentiating the types of pancreatic masses dete...
Comparison of tissue and molecular yield between fine-needle biopsy (FNB) and fine-needle aspiration (FNA): a randomized study
Comparison of tissue and molecular yield between fine-needle biopsy (FNB) and fine-needle aspiration (FNA): a randomized study
Abstract Background and study aims Recently, a new Franseen design endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) needle was developed with the goal of providi...
Endoscopic Choledochoduodenostomy versus Gallbladder Drainage for Malignant Biliary Obstruction: A Propensity Score Matched Study
Endoscopic Choledochoduodenostomy versus Gallbladder Drainage for Malignant Biliary Obstruction: A Propensity Score Matched Study
Abstract Introduction: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GB) is an emerging alternative to choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CBD) for malignant distal biliar...

Back to Top