Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 20
Filter
1.
Arq Gastroenterol ; 61: e23152, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38451671

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: • The ERCP even when done by experienced professionals, fails in 10% of cases. BACKGROUND: • Until the development of the EUS-BD, PTBD had a role as a rescue therapy, despite a high rate of adverse events. BACKGROUND: • The EUS-BD is safe and has similar efficacy, when compared to PTBD and should be performed immediately after ERCP failure. BACKGROUND: • A doctor with skills in both methods (ERCP/EUS) is needed to determine the best EUS-guided therapeutic option.


Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma , Pancreatic Neoplasms , Physicians , Humans , Cholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic Retrograde , Endosonography , Pancreatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Pancreatic Neoplasms/surgery , Adenocarcinoma/diagnostic imaging , Adenocarcinoma/surgery
3.
Arq Gastroenterol ; 60(3): 364-372, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37792767

ABSTRACT

•In pancreatic neoplasms the EUS plays a key role in the management. •During the pandemic period, lockdown measures prevented patients with comorbidities from performing EUS. •The D-EUS decreased during COVID-19, while I-EUS increased and EUS-TA was the most commonly I-EUS procedure performed, with no increase in adverse events. •Despite the moderate impact of the pandemic period in endoscopic services around the world, EUS-TA of solid and cystic tumors of the pancreas was the main indication. Background - Reports of the impact of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic period/2020 on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) are scarce. Objective - We analyzed the impact of the pandemic period/2020 on the demographics, indications, and number of diagnostic EUS (D-EUS) and interventional EUS (I-EUS) procedures performed in a high-volume endoscopy unit compared with the previous non-pandemic period/2019. Methods - We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all patients undergoing D-EUS or I-EUS from March 1, 2019, to February 29, 2020 (non-pandemic period/2019) and from March 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021 (pandemic period/2020). Data compared between the study periods included sex, age, comorbidities, EUS findings and diagnosis, need for interventional procedures during EUS, and adverse events (AEs). Results were significant at P<0.05. Results - EUS procedures decreased from 475 in the non-pandemic period/2019 to 289 in the pandemic period/2020, accounting for a 39% reduction. In non-pandemic period/2019, 388 (81.7%) D-EUS and 88 (18.5%) I-EUS were performed, against 206 (71.3%) D-EUS and 83 (28.7%) I-EUS in pandemic period/2020 (P=0.001). Only 5/289 (1.7%) patients had COVID-19. Fewer patients with comorbidities underwent EUS during pandemic period/2020 due to lockdown measures (P<0.001). D-EUS decreased, whereas I-EUS increased (P<0.001). EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) was the most common I-EUS, performed in 83/289 (28.7%) patients in pandemic period/2020, against 88/475 (18.5%) in non-pandemic period/2019 (P=0.001). AEs did not differ significantly between the study periods. Conclusion - Pandemic Period/2020 had a moderate impact on reducing EUS procedures due to the risks involved. Although I-EUS increased, EUS-related AEs did not. Solid and cystic pancreatic tumors remained a major indication for EUS-TA even during the pandemic period/2020.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pancreatic Neoplasms , Humans , Pandemics , Retrospective Studies , Brazil/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control , Endosonography/methods , Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology , Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal , Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration
4.
Arq. gastroenterol ; 60(3): 364-372, July-Sept. 2023. tab
Article in English | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: biblio-1513705

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT Background: Reports of the impact of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic period/2020 on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) are scarce. Objective: We analyzed the impact of the pandemic period/2020 on the demographics, indications, and number of diagnostic EUS (D-EUS) and interventional EUS (I-EUS) procedures performed in a high-volume endoscopy unit compared with the previous non-pandemic period/2019. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all patients undergoing D-EUS or I-EUS from March 1, 2019, to February 29, 2020 (non-pandemic period/2019) and from March 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021 (pandemic period/2020). Data compared between the study periods included sex, age, comorbidities, EUS findings and diagnosis, need for interventional procedures during EUS, and adverse events (AEs). Results were significant at P<0.05. Results: EUS procedures decreased from 475 in the non-pandemic period/2019 to 289 in the pandemic period/2020, accounting for a 39% reduction. In non-pandemic period/2019, 388 (81.7%) D-EUS and 88 (18.5%) I-EUS were performed, against 206 (71.3%) D-EUS and 83 (28.7%) I-EUS in pandemic period/2020 (P=0.001). Only 5/289 (1.7%) patients had COVID-19. Fewer patients with comorbidities underwent EUS during pandemic period/2020 due to lockdown measures (P<0.001). D-EUS decreased, whereas I-EUS increased (P<0.001). EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) was the most common I-EUS, performed in 83/289 (28.7%) patients in pandemic period/2020, against 88/475 (18.5%) in non-pandemic period/2019 (P=0.001). AEs did not differ significantly between the study periods. Conclusion: Pandemic Period/2020 had a moderate impact on reducing EUS procedures due to the risks involved. Although I-EUS increased, EUS-related AEs did not. Solid and cystic pancreatic tumors remained a major indication for EUS-TA even during the pandemic period/2020.


RESUMO Contexto: Os dados sobre o impacto da pandemia de COVID-19 2020 na ultrassonografia endoscópica (EUS) são escassos. Objetivo: Analisamos o impacto do período pandêmico/2020 na demografia, indicações e número das EUS diagnósticas (D-EUS) e intervencionistas EUS (I-EUS) realizados em uma unidade de endoscopia de alto volume e os comparamos com o período imediatamente anterior não-pandêmico/2019. Métodos: Revisamos retrospectivamente os prontuários de todos os pacientes submetidos a D-EUS ou I-EUS de 1 de março de 2019 a 29 de fevereiro de 2020 (período não-pandêmico/2019) e de 1º de março de 2020 a 28 de fevereiro de 2021 (período da pandemia/2020). Comparamos os dados entre os períodos do estudo incluímos o sexo, idade, comorbidades, achados e diagnóstico da EUS, necessidade de procedimentos intervencionistas durante a EUS e a ocorrência de eventos adversos (EAs). Os resultados foram significativos com P<0,05. Resultados: O número de ecoendoscopias diminuíram de 475 no período não-pandêmico/2019 para 289 no período pandêmico/2020, representando uma redução de 39%. No período não-pandêmico/2019 e pandêmico/2020 foram realizados 388 (81,7%) D-EUS e 88 (18,5%) I-EUS, contra 206 (71,3%) D-EUS e 83 (28,7%) I-EUS, respectivamente (P=0,001). Apenas 5/289 (1,7%) pacientes tinham COVID-19. Menos pacientes com comorbidades realizaram EUS durante o período pandêmico/2020 devido as medidas de bloqueio (P<0,001). D-EUS diminuiu, enquanto I-EUS aumentou (P<0,001). A EUS associada a aquisição tecidual (EUS-AT) foi a I-EUS mais comum, realizada em 83/289 (28,7%) pacientes no período pandêmico/2020, versus 88/475 (18,5%) no período não-pandêmico/2019 (P=0,001). Os EAs não diferiram significativamente entre os períodos do estudo. Conclusão: O período da pandemia/2020 teve impacto moderado na redução da EUS devido aos riscos envolvidos. Embora o I-EUS tenha aumentado, os EAs relacionados ao EUS não aumentaram. Os tumores pancreáticos sólidos e císticos permaneceram como uma das principais indicações para EUS-AT mesmo durante o período pandêmico/2020.

5.
Arq Gastroenterol ; 60(2): 282-284, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37556755

ABSTRACT

•Giant and solitary polyps evolve with anemia. •EUS is an important tool for stage and manage this disease. •Endoscopic treatment is the best treatment choice. •Supplementary video available on this case report.


Subject(s)
Anemia , Hamartoma , Peutz-Jeghers Syndrome , Polyps , Humans , Peutz-Jeghers Syndrome/complications , Peutz-Jeghers Syndrome/surgery , Polyps/complications , Polyps/surgery , Endoscopy , Hamartoma/complications , Hamartoma/surgery , Anemia/etiology
6.
Cureus ; 15(7): e41576, 2023 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37554612

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Compare the 22G needle versus EchoTip ProCore® 20 (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA) on their handling, specimen suitability, amount of tissue obtained, diagnostic performance, the possibility of immunohistochemistry, and rate of adverse events. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective, comparative study of consecutively examined patients with pancreatic masses who underwent endosonography-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) via the 22G needle, and endosonography-guided tissue acquisition (TA) via ProCore 20 (PC20). The operator evaluated needle insertion and subjectively classified the specimen. The pathologist measured the samples, classified the amount of tissue, and determined the influence of bleeding on the interpretation. RESULTS: A total of 129 patients participated in the study, out of whom 52 underwent endosonography-guided FNA with 22G and 77 underwent endosonography-guided TA with a PC20 needle. Malignant lesions were found in 106, and 23 had benign lesions. The duodenal route was used in 62% of patients. The 22G needle was easier to introduce (p=0.0495). However, PC20 obtained a larger amount (p<0.01) with fewer punctures (p<0.001). The PC20 also yielded a larger average microcore diameter (p=0.0032). Microhistology was adequate for 22G and PC20 in 22 (42.2%) and 50 (78.1%) specimens, respectively (p<0.001). Bleeding was not significantly different (p>0.999). Immunohistochemistry was possible in 36 (69.2%) and 40 (51.9%) specimens obtained by 22G and PC20, respectively (p=0.075). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of 22G were 93.5%, 100%, 100%, 66.7%, and 94.2%, respectively; and for PC20, it was 95%, 100%, 100%, 85%, and 96.1%, respectively. Mild bleeding was the most common early adverse event, occurring in 2/52 (3.8%) 22G and 4/77 (5.2%) PC20 cases (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The PC20 required fewer punctures and reduced the need for immunohistochemistry as it yielded better and larger microcores. Its ease of insertion into the target lesion makes it a good option to obtain satisfactory microcore specimens in difficult positions, such as the transduodenal route.

8.
Cureus ; 14(11): e31344, 2022 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36514643

ABSTRACT

While approximately 85% of neoplasms are ductal pancreatic adenocarcinomas (DPA), adenosquamous pancreatic carcinoma (APC) is a rare subtype of pancreatic cancer that exhibits aggressive behavior and poor prognosis. The authors report three cases of primary APC diagnosed through endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) using the new ProCore 20G needle, which had been developed to improve fine-needle aspiration results by providing more tissue for histopathology. Given its ability for microcore retrieval, pancreatic stroma examination, and excellent histopathology results, EUS-TA has exhibited exceptional diagnostic yield among patients with solid pancreatic lesions. All three APC cases presented herein had been accurately diagnosed using immunohistochemistry after microcore acquisition.

9.
Arq Gastroenterol ; 59(4): 456-461, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36515337

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasonography is used in the diagnosis and treatment of digestive diseases in adults. In children, its use is limited due to a lack of available expertise. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of endoscopic ultrasonography on diagnostic and therapeutic strategy changes in pediatric patients. METHODS: Over ten years, this study retrospectively and consecutively analyzed children aged ≤18 years who underwent endoscopic ultrasonography because of inconclusive imaging or laboratory tests. The indications, results, occurrence of adverse events, and clinical impact of the procedures were analyzed. The clinical impact was classified as major (when the findings led to changes in diagnosis and management), minor (change in diagnosis but not in management), or none (no change in diagnosis or management). RESULTS: Overall, 107 children [77 (72%) of whom were female; mean age: 11.7 ± 4 years] underwent upper [102 (95.3%)] and lower [5 (4.7%)] endoscopic ultrasonography; 64 (58%) patients underwent diagnostic endoscopic ultrasonography, and 43 (42%) underwent interventional endoscopic ultrasonography. Endoscopic ultrasonography was used to investigate pancreaticobiliary, gastric, rectal, esophageal, duodenal, and mediastinal diseases in 81 (76%), 14 (13%), 5 (4.6%), 3 (2.8%), 2 (1.8%), and 2 (1.8%) patients, respectively. The clinical impact was significant in 81% of the children. Major and no clinical impact on pancreaticobiliary, gastrointestinal diseases, and mediastinal masses occurred in 50 (62%) and 13 (16%), 13 (54%) and 9 (37%), and 2 (100%) and 0 (0%) of the patients, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study evaluated the impact of diagnostic and interventional endoscopic ultrasonography in pediatric patients. When clinically and appropriately indicated, these procedures are safe and effective diagnostic or therapeutic interventions in pediatric patients with gastrointestinal or pancreaticobiliary disorders.


Subject(s)
Digestive System Diseases , Gastrointestinal Diseases , Child , Humans , Female , Adolescent , Male , Endosonography/methods , Retrospective Studies , Digestive System Diseases/diagnostic imaging , Ultrasonography, Interventional , Gastrointestinal Diseases/diagnostic imaging , Gastrointestinal Diseases/etiology
10.
Arq. gastroenterol ; 59(4): 456-461, Out,-Dec. 2022. tab
Article in English | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: biblio-1420208

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT Background: Endoscopic ultrasonography is used in the diagnosis and treatment of digestive diseases in adults. In children, its use is limited due to a lack of available expertise. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of endoscopic ultrasonography on diagnostic and therapeutic strategy changes in pediatric patients. Methods: Over ten years, this study retrospectively and consecutively analyzed children aged ≤18 years who underwent endoscopic ultrasonography because of inconclusive imaging or laboratory tests. The indications, results, occurrence of adverse events, and clinical impact of the procedures were analyzed. The clinical impact was classified as major (when the findings led to changes in diagnosis and management), minor (change in diagnosis but not in management), or none (no change in diagnosis or management). Results: Overall, 107 children [77 (72%) of whom were female; mean age: 11.7 ± 4 years] underwent upper [102 (95.3%)] and lower [5 (4.7%)] endoscopic ultrasonography; 64 (58%) patients underwent diagnostic endoscopic ultrasonography, and 43 (42%) underwent interventional endoscopic ultrasonography. Endoscopic ultrasonography was used to investigate pancreaticobiliary, gastric, rectal, esophageal, duodenal, and mediastinal diseases in 81 (76%), 14 (13%), 5 (4.6%), 3 (2.8%), 2 (1.8%), and 2 (1.8%) patients, respectively. The clinical impact was significant in 81% of the children. Major and no clinical impact on pancreaticobiliary, gastrointestinal diseases, and mediastinal masses occurred in 50 (62%) and 13 (16%), 13 (54%) and 9 (37%), and 2 (100%) and 0 (0%) of the patients, respectively. Conclusion: This study evaluated the impact of diagnostic and interventional endoscopic ultrasonography in pediatric patients. When clinically and appropriately indicated, these procedures are safe and effective diagnostic or therapeutic interventions in pediatric patients with gastrointestinal or pancreaticobiliary disorders.


RESUMO Contexto: A ecoendoscopia (EUS) faz parte da prática clínica diária no diagnóstico e tratamento de doenças digestivas em adultos, no entanto, seu uso em crianças é limitado. Objetivo: O objetivo do trabalho foi avaliar o impacto clínico da ecoendoscopia diagnóstica (EUS-D) e ecoendoscopia intervencionista (EUS-I) na população pediátrica. Métodos: Por um período de 10 anos, analisamos retrospectivamente os prontuários de 107 crianças (≤18 anos) submetidas à ecoendoscopia alta [102 (95.3%)] e ecoendoscopia baixa [5 (4.7%)] que tiveram teste de imagem ou laboratorial inconclusivos. O impacto clínico foi classificado como forte (quando mudou o diagnóstico e a terapêutica), fraco (modificou o diagnóstico, mas não o manejo) e ausente (não houve mudança nem do diagnóstico e nem no manejo). Resultados: 107 meninas (72%) e 30 meninos (28%), média de idade 11.7±4 anos (5-18), foram submetidas à ecoendoscopia. 64 (58%) à EUS-D e 43 (42%) à EUS-I [EUS-FNA em 33 (77%) e 10 (33%) a drenagens (pseudocisto (5), walled off necrosis (2), perirectal abscesso (1)) e neurólise do plexo celíaco (2). O sucesso técnico, clínico e a taxa de efeitos adversos para a EUS-I foram de 100%, 90% e 0%, respectivamente. A via biliopancreática foi estudada em 81 (76%), estômago 14 (13%), reto 5 (4.6%), esôfago 3 (2.8%), duodeno 2 (1.8%) e mediastino 2 (1.8%) casos. O impacto clínico total foi de 81%. O impacto clínico foi forte e fraco para a via biliopancreática (81), gastrointestinal (24) e mediastinal (2) em 62% e 16%, 54% e 37% e 100% e 0%, respectivamente. A sensibilidade, especificidade e acurácia da EUS-FNA com microhistologia foi de 76.2%, 100% e 84.8%, respectivamente. Conclusão: Os autores concluem que a EUS-D e a EUS-I são efetivas e seguras quando indicadas corretamente para as doenças digestivas em crianças. A EUS-FNA tem elevada acurácia e pode esclarecer a maioria dos casos duvidosos, determinando o diagnóstico preciso das enfermidades digestivas. O impacto clínico foi grande em relação ao diagnóstico e a mudança do tipo de tratamento na maioria das crianças.

13.
Arq Gastroenterol ; 58(2): 240-245, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34287531

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Duodenal papilla neuroendocrine tumors (DP-NET) are rare. Surgical therapy may be recommended for their treatment. However, they have high rates of morbidity and mortality. Endoscopic papillectomy (EP) is safe and effective for complete resection of tumors at this site. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe a case series of DP-NETs resected by EP and perform a literature review. METHODS: A series of patients with DP-NETs underwent EP as primary treatment between Jan/2008 and Mar/2020 at a tertiary referral center. A comprehensive search was made on the MEDLINE primary electronic database. The search strategy was designed to find all articles related to DP-NETs published in the literature. RESULTS: Six patients underwent EP for presenting DP-NETs, four of whom were women (mean age, 63 years). The mean diameter of DP-NETs was 1.6±0.3 cm. Four of six patients were followed up, one of whom suffered relapse at the resection site after 3 months and was referred to surgery (pT3n1b) and the remaining three patients experienced no endoscopic or histological recurrence during follow-up periods of 10, 7, and 4 years, respectively. Eighteen articles were found in the literature search in MEDLINE. The articles included case reports of endoscopically treated DP-NETs. CONCLUSION: EP is safe and effective for DP-NETs that are ≤20 mm, confined to the submucosal layer, well-differentiated, and without local or remote metastasis. Adequate endoscopic follow-up and definitive surgical treatment in the presence of relapse are necessary.


Subject(s)
Duodenal Neoplasms , Neuroendocrine Tumors , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Neuroendocrine Tumors/surgery , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
14.
Arq. gastroenterol ; 58(2): 240-245, Apr.-June 2021. tab
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-1285326

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Duodenal papilla neuroendocrine tumors (DP-NET) are rare. Surgical therapy may be recommended for their treatment. However, they have high rates of morbidity and mortality. Endoscopic papillectomy (EP) is safe and effective for complete resection of tumors at this site. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe a case series of DP-NETs resected by EP and perform a literature review. METHODS: A series of patients with DP-NETs underwent EP as primary treatment between Jan/2008 and Mar/2020 at a tertiary referral center. A comprehensive search was made on the MEDLINE primary electronic database. The search strategy was designed to find all articles related to DP-NETs published in the literature. RESULTS: Six patients underwent EP for presenting DP-NETs, four of whom were women (mean age, 63 years). The mean diameter of DP-NETs was 1.6±0.3 cm. Four of six patients were followed up, one of whom suffered relapse at the resection site after 3 months and was referred to surgery (pT3n1b) and the remaining three patients experienced no endoscopic or histological recurrence during follow-up periods of 10, 7, and 4 years, respectively. Eighteen articles were found in the literature search in MEDLINE. The articles included case reports of endoscopically treated DP-NETs. CONCLUSION: EP is safe and effective for DP-NETs that are ≤20 mm, confined to the submucosal layer, well-differentiated, and without local or remote metastasis. Adequate endoscopic follow-up and definitive surgical treatment in the presence of relapse are necessary.


RESUMO CONTEXTO: Tumores neuroendócrinos da papila duodenal (TNE-PD) são raros. A cirurgia deve ser recomendada para o tratamento. No entanto, apresentam altas taxas de morbimortalidade. A papilectomia endoscópica (PE) é segura e eficaz para a ressecção completa de tumores nesta região. OBJETIVO: Descrever uma série de casos de TNEs-PD ressecados por PE e realizar uma revisão da literatura. MÉTODOS: Pacientes com TNEs-PD submetidos a PE como tratamento primário com intenção curativa entre jan/2008 e mar/2020 em um centro de referência terciário foram estudados. Uma pesquisa abrangente foi feita no MEDLINE. A estratégia de busca foi desenhada para encontrar todos os artigos relacionados a TNEs-PD publicados na literatura, que haviam sido submetidos a PE. RESULTADOS: Seis pacientes foram submetidos a PE por apresentar TNEs-PD, sendo quatro mulheres, com média de idade de 66 anos (22-96). O diâmetro médio dos TNEs-PD foi de 1,8±0,4 cm. Quatro dos seis pacientes foram acompanhados, um dos quais sofreu recidiva no local da ressecção após 3 meses e foi encaminhado para cirurgia (pT3n1b), e os três pacientes restantes não apresentaram recorrência endoscópica ou histológica durante os períodos de acompanhamento de 10, 7 e 4 anos, respectivamente. Dezoito artigos foram encontrados no MEDLINE. Os artigos incluíram relatos de casos de TNEs-PD tratados pela PE. CONCLUSÃO: A PE é segura e eficaz para TNEs-PD ≤20 mm, confinados à camada submucosa, bem diferenciados e sem metástases locais ou remotas. Acompanhamento endoscópico adequado e tratamento cirúrgico definitivo na vigência de recidiva são necessários.


Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Neuroendocrine Tumors/surgery , Duodenal Neoplasms , Retrospective Studies , Follow-Up Studies , Treatment Outcome , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local
17.
Scand J Gastroenterol ; 55(8): 995-1001, 2020 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32663052

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Escalating an indication of EUS for diagnosis and treatment justifies the evaluation of the conditions associated with the adverse events (AE) and related deaths. The aim is to evaluate and compare the incidence of AE and deaths after diagnostic-EUS (D-EUS) and interventional-EUS (I-EUS). METHODS: This retrospective study included patients undergoing D-EUS and I-EUS, in two centers for 28 years (03/1992 to 12/2019). Were noted parameters such as: age, gender, indication of EUS, modality, time of occurrence and severity of AE, type of treatment imposed and whether there was death. Descriptive analysis was performed using means, standard deviation and frequencies of the variables of interest. RESULTS: 13,196 procedures performed, 9843 D-EUS and 3353 I-EUS. Thirty-seven (0.3%) had AE with six deaths (0.04%). The overall rate of AE for D-EUS and I-EUS was 0.08% and 0.86%, respectively (p > .05). Three deaths (0.03%) occurred after D-EUS and three (0.09%) after I-EUS. AE were immediate and early in 70% and 30%, respectively, with no late complications. Perforation was detected immediately in 80% and early in 20%, being more frequent after D-EUS than I-EUS. Acute pancreatitis occurred immediately in 70% and early in 30%. The AE were mild, moderate, and severe in 35.1%, 27%, and 37.8%, respectively. Overall, D-EUS presented the majority of AE as severe (87.5%), while I-EUS presented mild AE in most cases (41.4%), followed by severe complications (24.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the low incidence of AE and mortality after EUS, the occurrence of severe complications, especially perforation in D-EUS, may support the review of therapeutic protocols, aiming to ensure that a quality and safety process is implemented in the practice of EUS.


Subject(s)
Endosonography , Pancreatitis , Ultrasonography, Interventional , Acute Disease , Endosonography/adverse effects , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Ultrasonography, Interventional/adverse effects
18.
Pancreas ; 49(4): 584-590, 2020 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32282774

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze the usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) microhistology to detect malignancy in pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs). METHODS: Patients with PCLs were identified and submitted to EUS-FNA from January 2010 to January 2017. The percentage of samples suitable for diagnostic classification by microhistology and the positive and negative likelihood ratios to detect malignancy in asymptomatic (APC) and symptomatic (SPC) PCLs were determined. RESULTS: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration was performed in 510 patients. The resulting material was processed by microhistology and useful for diagnosis in 432 (84.2%). Clinical characteristics of APC (341) and SPC (169) revealed that APC patients were younger (P = 0.004) and had smaller PCLs (23 vs 35 mm; P < 0.001). In APC, we found more preneoplastic (38.7% vs 30.2%; P = 0.0016) and a lower number of malignant PCLs (8.2% vs 24.3%; P < 0.001). In APC and SPC, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of microhistology to detect malignancy were 71.4%, 99.7%, 95.2%, 97.5%, and 97.4% (k = 0.80) and 58.5%, 96.9%, 85.7%, 87.9%, and 87.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration was technically feasible. Microhistology was especially useful to detect neoplastic or malignant PCLs in APC patients.


Subject(s)
Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration/methods , Pancreatic Cyst/diagnostic imaging , Pancreatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Amylases/analysis , Asymptomatic Diseases , Biomarkers, Tumor/analysis , Carcinoma/diagnosis , Carcinoma/diagnostic imaging , Carcinoma in Situ/diagnosis , Carcinoma in Situ/diagnostic imaging , Child , Diagnosis, Differential , Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration/adverse effects , Female , Histological Techniques/methods , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pancreatic Cyst/chemistry , Pancreatic Cyst/etiology , Pancreatic Cyst/pathology , Pancreatic Diseases/complications , Pancreatic Diseases/diagnosis , Pancreatic Neoplasms/chemistry , Pancreatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology , Precancerous Conditions/diagnosis , Precancerous Conditions/diagnostic imaging , Predictive Value of Tests , Young Adult
19.
Sci Rep ; 10(1): 4132, 2020 03 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32139734

ABSTRACT

Acute pancreatitis (AP) is a common adverse event (AE) of endoscopic papillectomy (EP). Prophylactic plastic pancreatic stent (PPS) placement appears to prevent AP. We evaluated factors associated with post-EP AP by a retrospective analysis of patients with tumors of the duodenal papilla who underwent EP from January 2008 to November 2016 at 2 tertiary care centers. Clinical, laboratory, endoscopic ultrasound parameters, and PPS placement were evaluated. Seventy-two patients underwent EP (37 men), with mean age of 60.3 (31-88) years. Mean main pancreatic duct (MPD) diameter was 0.44 (0.18-1.8) cm. Mean tumor size was 1.8 (0.5-9.6) cm. Tumors were staged as uT1N0, uT2N0, and uT1N1 in 87.5%, 11.1%, and 1.4%. Thirty-eight AEs occurred in 33 (45.8%) patients, with no mortality. Total bilirubin, tumor size, MPD diameter, and PPS placement had odds ratios (ORs) of 0.82, 0.14, 0.00, and 6.43 for AP. Multivariate analysis (PPS placement × MPD diameter) showed ORs of 4.62 (95%CI, 1.03-21.32; p = 0.049) and 0.000 (95%CI, 0.00-0.74; p = 0.042) for AP. In conclusion, patients with jaundice, large tumors, and dilated MPD seem less likely to have post-EP AP. PPS placement was associated with a higher risk of AP, which may question its use.


Subject(s)
Pancreatitis/etiology , Prophylactic Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Sphincterotomy, Endoscopic/adverse effects , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Common Bile Duct Neoplasms/surgery , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Odds Ratio , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...