Z Gastroenterol 2019; 57(05): e141
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1691882
POSTER
Endoskopie
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Factors for the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of solid pancreatic masses-a real life analysis in a newly established gastrointestinal center

S Bota
1   Department of Internal Medicine and Gastroenterology (IMuG), Hepatology, Endocrinology, Rheumatology and Nephrology and Emergency Medicine (ZAE) with Centralized Endoscopy Service, Klinikum Klagenfurt am Wörthersee, Klagenfurt, Austria
,
M Razpotnik
1   Department of Internal Medicine and Gastroenterology (IMuG), Hepatology, Endocrinology, Rheumatology and Nephrology and Emergency Medicine (ZAE) with Centralized Endoscopy Service, Klinikum Klagenfurt am Wörthersee, Klagenfurt, Austria
,
G Essler
1   Department of Internal Medicine and Gastroenterology (IMuG), Hepatology, Endocrinology, Rheumatology and Nephrology and Emergency Medicine (ZAE) with Centralized Endoscopy Service, Klinikum Klagenfurt am Wörthersee, Klagenfurt, Austria
,
J Weber-Eibel
1   Department of Internal Medicine and Gastroenterology (IMuG), Hepatology, Endocrinology, Rheumatology and Nephrology and Emergency Medicine (ZAE) with Centralized Endoscopy Service, Klinikum Klagenfurt am Wörthersee, Klagenfurt, Austria
,
M Peck-Radosavljevic
1   Department of Internal Medicine and Gastroenterology (IMuG), Hepatology, Endocrinology, Rheumatology and Nephrology and Emergency Medicine (ZAE) with Centralized Endoscopy Service, Klinikum Klagenfurt am Wörthersee, Klagenfurt, Austria
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
16 May 2019 (online)

 
 

    Aim:

    to investigate the factors which influence the accuracy and sensitivity (Se) of EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic masses.

    Methods:

    87 Patients with 96EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic masses performed between 2014 – 2018 were enrolled in this retrospective study. Final diagnosis was establish by histopathology, surgery, radiological findings, and clinical follow-up.

    Positive EUS-FNA was defined as the finding of at least atypical cells with dysplasia.

    Per definition, an experienced endosonographer has performed at least 150 EUS including 50 interventions.

    Results:

    The mean age of patients was 66.6 ± 13.5 years. The most common final diagnosis was adenocarcinoma (66.6%), following by inflammation (9.2%), neuroendocrine tumors (8.1%). The overall accuracy was 65.6%, with lowest value in 2016 (27.2%) and highest value in 2018 (79.3%).

    Overall Se for detecting malignancy was 56%, with lowest value in 2016 (27.2%) and highest value in 2018 (76%).

    Endosonographer experience seems to influence the accuracy as well the Se of FNA. There was a significant difference in favour of 19G vs. 22G needle: 66.6% vs. 36.3%, p = 0.03. EUS-FNA of the larger lesions were more accurate in comparison to the smaller pancreatic masses (Table).

    Tab. 1

    Factor

    Size:< 2 cm (A) vs. 2 – 4 cm (B) vs. > 4 cm (C)

    Sensitivity (%)

    50% vs. 51.9% vs. 76.9%

    A vs. B: p = 0.81

    A vs. C: p = 0.36

    B vs. C: p = 0.18

    Accuracy (%)

    61.5% vs. 59.7% vs. 82.3%

    A vs. B: p = 0.85

    A vs. C: P = 0.39

    B vs. C: p = 0.14

    Localisation: Uncinate (A) vs. Head (B) vs. Body (C) vs. Tail (D)

    57.1% vs. 53.8% vs. 53.8% vs. 66.6%

    A vs. B: p = 0.92

    A vs. C: p = 0.82

    A vs. D: p = 0.98

    B vs. C: p = 0.74

    B vs. D: p = 0.74

    C vs. D: p = 0.87

    63.1% vs. 60.7% vs. 61.1% vs. 72.7%

    A vs. B: p = 0.92

    A vs. C: p = 0.83

    A vs. D: p = 0.89

    B vs. C: p = 0.80

    B vs. D: p = 0.68

    C vs. D: p = 0.81

    Needle: 19 Gvs. 22 G

    64.1% vs. 36.3%

    p = 0.04

    70% vs. 48.1%

    p = 0.06

    Stent in the main biliary duct: yes vs. no

    56.2% vs. 55.9%

    p = 0.79

    64.2% vs. 64.7%

    p = 0.72

    Trainee vs. experienced

    47.2% vs. 64.1%

    p = 0.18

    57.4% vs. 70%

    p = 0.20

    Conclusion:

    Endosonographer experience, needle size and size of pancreatic lesion seems to influence the accuracy and Se of EUS-FNA. We observed an overall accuracy and Se lower than reported by high volume centers, but with a significant improvement with increasing operator experience.