OBJECTIVE. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) may facilitate tissue sampling for histopathological diagnosis of subepithelial tumors (SETs) in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. However, immunohistochemistry is not always feasible using EUS-FNA samples due to the low quality of specimens often obtained by aspiration. This study aimed to compare the use of 22-gauge (G) EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) with 22G EUS-FNA for core sampling used for histopathological examination, including immunohistochemistry, in patients with GI SETs. METHODS. Twenty-eight patients with GI SETs ≥2 cm in size were prospectively enrolled at five university hospitals in Korea between January and June 2013. They were randomized to undergo either EUS-FNB or EUS-FNA. RESULTS. A total of 22 patients was finally analyzed in this study: 10 and 12 patients underwent EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB, respectively. Compared to the EUS-FNA group, the EUS-FNB group had a significantly lower median number of needle passes to obtain macroscopically optimal core samples (4 vs. 2, p = 0.025); higher yield rates of macroscopically and histologically optimal core samples with three needle passes (30% vs. 92%, p = 0.006; 20% vs. 75%, p = 0.010, respectively); and a higher diagnostic sufficiency rate (20% vs. 75%, p = 0.010). No technical difficulties were encountered in either group. CONCLUSIONS. This study shows that EUS-FNB has a better ability to obtain histological core samples and a higher diagnostic sufficiency rate than EUS-FNA and that EUS-FNB is a feasible, safe, and preferable modality for adequate core sampling for histopathological diagnosis of GI SETs.
Subepithelial tumors are frequently found in asymptomatic patients in Japan and Korea where cancer screening tests routinely include endoscopy. Most lesions are asymptomatic and clinically insignificant. However, carcinoid tumors, lymphomas, glomus tumor and gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are malignant or have the potential to become malignant. Inflammation due to parasitic infestation by Anisakis and poorly differentiated adenocarcinomas in the stomach rarely present as subepithelial lesions. In contrast to the frequency of gastric GIST in the gastrointestinal system, they are uncommon in the duodenum and very rare in the esophagus. The prognosis of patients with GISTs in the stomach is relatively good compared with GISTs in other organs. Along with the location of the tumor, its size and mitotic count are major factors that determine the malignant potential of GIST. Small (<2 cm) asymptomatic GISTs usually have benign clinical course. GIST is the most common subepithelial tumor to occur in the stomach. Although various methods are employed to diagnose GISTs, the risk of GIST metastasis cannot be accurately predicted before lesions are completely resected. Recently, new endoscopic diagnostic methods and treatment techniques have been developed that allow the diagnosis and resection of lesions located in the muscularis propria, without any complications. These endoscopic methods have different indications depending on regions where they are performed.
One of the most important prognostic factors in esophageal carcinoma is lymph node metastasis, and in particular, the number of affected lymph nodes, which influences long-term outcomes. The esophageal lymphatic system is connected longitudinally and transversally; thus, the pattern of lymph node metastases is very complex. Early esophageal cancer frequently exhibits skipped metastasis, and minimal surgery using sentinel node navigation cannot be performed. In Korea, most esophageal cancer cases are squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), although the incidence of adenocarcinoma has started to increase recently. Most previous reports have failed to differentiate between SCC and adenocarcinoma, despite the fact that the Union for International Cancer Control (7th edition) and American Joint Committee on Cancer staging systems both consider these separately because they differ in cause, biology, lymph node metastasis, and outcome. Endoscopic tumor resection is an effective and safe treatment for lesions with no associated lymph node metastasis. Esophageal mucosal cancer confined to the lamina propria is an absolute indication for endoscopic resection, and a lesion that has invaded the muscularis mucosae can be cured by local resection if invasion to the lymphatic system has not occurred.
Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been widely accepted as a curative treatment for gastric neoplasm. Pyloric stenosis is a chronic complication that can be caused by ESD. The aim of this study is to clarify the risk factors and management for pyloric stenosis. From January 2004 to January 2014, a total of 126 patients who underwent ESD adjacent to pylorus were reviewed retrospectively. Pyloric mucosal defect was defined as when any resection margin of ESD was involved in the pyloric ring. Pyloric stenosis was defined as when a conventional endoscope could not be passed to the duodenum. Among the 126 patients, pyloric stenosis was identified in 9. In a univariate analysis, pyloric stenosis was more common in older patients (P < 0.05) and in lesions with resections over 75% of the pyloric ring circumference (P < 0.001). In a multivariate analysis, the factor that was associated with pyloric stenosis was the extent of the pyloric ring dissection (P < 0.001). Four of the 9 patients with pyloric stenosis had mild dyspepsia, and the others had gastric outlet obstruction symptoms. The 5 symptomatic patients underwent endoscopic balloon dilation (EBD), and the frequency of EBD was 1 to 8 times. The asymptomatic patients were treated conservatively. The incidence of pyloric stenosis was higher in lesions with resections over 75% of the pyloric ring circumference. Although EBD was an effective treatment for pyloric stenosis, conservative management was also helpful in patients who had mild symptoms.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.