scholarly journals False-negative rate of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for pancreatic solid and cystic lesions with matched surgical resections as the gold standard

2013 ◽  
Vol 121 (8) ◽  
pp. 449-458 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsten M. W. Woolf ◽  
Hua Liang ◽  
Zachary J. Sletten ◽  
Donna K. Russell ◽  
Thomas A. Bonfiglio ◽  
...  
CytoJournal ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane Bernstein ◽  
Berrin Ustun ◽  
Ahmed Alomari ◽  
Fang Bao ◽  
Harry R. Aslanian ◽  
...  

Background: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) are rare tumors of the pancreas, which are increasingly diagnosed by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). In this retrospective study, we assessed the performance of EUS-FNA in diagnosing PNETs. Materials and Methods: We identified 48 cases of surgically resected PNETs in which pre-operative EUS-FNA was performed. The clinical features, cytological diagnoses, and surgical follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. The diagnostic performance of EUS-FNA was analyzed as compared to the diagnosis in the follow-up. The cases with discrepancies between cytological diagnosis and surgical follow-up were analyzed and diagnostic pitfalls in discrepant cases were discussed. Results: The patients were 20 male and 28 female with ages ranging from 15 years to 81 years (mean 57 years). The tumors were solid and cystic in 41 and 7 cases, respectively, with sizes ranging from 0.5 cm to 11 cm (mean 2.7 cm). Based on cytomorphologic features and adjunct immunocytochemistry results, when performed, 38 patients (79%) were diagnosed with PNET, while a diagnosis of suspicious for PNET or a diagnosis of neoplasm with differential diagnosis including PNET was rendered in the 3 patients (6%). One case was diagnosed as mucinous cystic neoplasm (2%). The remaining 6 patients (13%) had non-diagnostic, negative or atypical diagnosis. Conclusions: Our data demonstrated that EUS-FNA has a relatively high sensitivity for diagnosing PNETs. Lack of additional materials for immunocytochemical studies could lead to a less definite diagnosis. Non-diagnostic or false negative FNA diagnosis can be seen in a limited number of cases, especially in those small sized tumors.


Pancreas ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 584-590
Author(s):  
Spencer Vaiciunas ◽  
Eloy Taglieri ◽  
Otávio Micelli-Neto ◽  
Mariângela Ottoboni Brunaldi ◽  
Filadélfio Venco ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 102 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-48
Author(s):  
M Jinih ◽  
F Faisal ◽  
K Abdalla ◽  
M Majeed ◽  
AA Achakzai ◽  
...  

Introduction The diagnostic performance of ultrasound-fine needle aspiration to identify thyroid nodules harbouring malignancy remains variable. The aim of this study was to determine thyroid nodule size and cytological classification as predictors of malignancy risk. Materials and methods We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis at an academic hospital involving 499 consecutive patients who underwent thyroid surgery between 2004 and 2015. Results A total of 503 thyroid nodules (499 patients, 84% female; mean age 50.8 years, standard deviation, SD, 15.4 years) were analysed. Of these, 19.5% were malignant. The mean (± SD) nodule size was 3.28 ± 1.63 cm and 3.27 ± 1.54 cm for benign and malignant nodules, respectively. The odds of malignancy for thyroid nodules less than 3.0 cm was similar to those for nodules of 3.0 cm or greater (0.26 compared with 0.29; p=0.77). Overall, the sensitivity and specificity of fine-needle aspiration in this cohort were 71.4% and 100%, respectively. The overall false negative rate was 5.4%. When the cut-off of 3.0 cm was used, the false negative rate in thyroid nodules less than 3.0 cm was 0% compared with 7.0% in nodules of 3.0 cm or greater. Thus, class (p<0.01) but not nodule size (p=0.49), was associated with higher malignancy risk. Conclusions Our results suggest that thyroid nodule size did not accurately predict the risk of thyroid malignancy irrespective of fine-needle aspiration cytology. Routine diagnostic thyroid lobectomy solely owing to thyroid nodule size of 3.0 cm or greater is currently not justified.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document