Accuracy and Quality Assessment of EUS-FNA: A Single-Center Large Cohort of Biopsies

Introduction. Thorough quality control (QC) study with systemic monitoring and evaluation is crucial to optimizing the effectiveness of EUS-FNA. Methods. Retrospective analysis was composed of investigating consecutive patient files that underwent EUS-FNA. QC specifically focused on diagnostic accu...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors:	Bluen, Benjamin Ephraim, Lachter, Jesse, Khamaysi, Iyad, Kamal, Yassin, Malkin, Leonid, Keren, Ruth, Epelbaum, Ron, Kluger, Yoram
Format:	Online
Language:	English
Published:	Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2012
Online Access:	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3503321/

id	pubmed-3503321
recordtype	oai_dc
spelling	pubmed-35033212012-11-29 Accuracy and Quality Assessment of EUS-FNA: A Single-Center Large Cohort of Biopsies Bluen, Benjamin Ephraim Lachter, Jesse Khamaysi, Iyad Kamal, Yassin Malkin, Leonid Keren, Ruth Epelbaum, Ron Kluger, Yoram Research Article Introduction. Thorough quality control (QC) study with systemic monitoring and evaluation is crucial to optimizing the effectiveness of EUS-FNA. Methods. Retrospective analysis was composed of investigating consecutive patient files that underwent EUS-FNA. QC specifically focused on diagnostic accuracy, impacts on preexisting diagnoses, and case management. Results. 268 patient files were evaluated. EUS-FNA cytology helped establish accurate diagnoses in 92.54% (248/268) of patients. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy were 83%, 100%, 100%, 91.6%, and 94%, respectively. The most common biopsy site was the pancreas (68%). The most accurate location for EUS-FNA was the esophagus, 13/13 (100%), followed by the pancreas (89.6%). EUS-FNA was least informative for abdominal lymph nodes (70.5%). After FNA and followup, eight false negatives for tumors were found (3%), while 7.5% of samples still lacked a definitive diagnosis. Discussion. QC suggests that the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA might be improved further by (1) taking more FNA passes from suspected lesions, (2) optimizing needle selection (3) having an experienced echo-endoscopist available during the learning curve, and (4) having a cytologist present during the procedure. QC also identified remediable reporting errors. In conclusion, QC study is valuable in identifying weaknesses and thereby augmenting the effectiveness of EUS-FNA. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2012 2012-10-31 /pmc/articles/PMC3503321/ /pubmed/23197929 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/139563 Text en Copyright © 2012 Benjamin Ephraim Bluen et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
repository_type	Open Access Journal
institution_category	Foreign Institution
institution	US National Center for Biotechnology Information
building	NCBI PubMed
collection	Online Access
language	English
format	Online
author	Bluen, Benjamin Ephraim Lachter, Jesse Khamaysi, Iyad Kamal, Yassin Malkin, Leonid Keren, Ruth Epelbaum, Ron Kluger, Yoram
spellingShingle	Bluen, Benjamin Ephraim Lachter, Jesse Khamaysi, Iyad Kamal, Yassin Malkin, Leonid Keren, Ruth Epelbaum, Ron Kluger, Yoram Accuracy and Quality Assessment of EUS-FNA: A Single-Center Large Cohort of Biopsies
author_facet	Bluen, Benjamin Ephraim Lachter, Jesse Khamaysi, Iyad Kamal, Yassin Malkin, Leonid Keren, Ruth Epelbaum, Ron Kluger, Yoram
author_sort	Bluen, Benjamin Ephraim
title	Accuracy and Quality Assessment of EUS-FNA: A Single-Center Large Cohort of Biopsies
title_short	Accuracy and Quality Assessment of EUS-FNA: A Single-Center Large Cohort of Biopsies
title_full	Accuracy and Quality Assessment of EUS-FNA: A Single-Center Large Cohort of Biopsies
title_fullStr	Accuracy and Quality Assessment of EUS-FNA: A Single-Center Large Cohort of Biopsies
title_full_unstemmed	Accuracy and Quality Assessment of EUS-FNA: A Single-Center Large Cohort of Biopsies
title_sort	accuracy and quality assessment of eus-fna: a single-center large cohort of biopsies
description	Introduction. Thorough quality control (QC) study with systemic monitoring and evaluation is crucial to optimizing the effectiveness of EUS-FNA. Methods. Retrospective analysis was composed of investigating consecutive patient files that underwent EUS-FNA. QC specifically focused on diagnostic accuracy, impacts on preexisting diagnoses, and case management. Results. 268 patient files were evaluated. EUS-FNA cytology helped establish accurate diagnoses in 92.54% (248/268) of patients. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy were 83%, 100%, 100%, 91.6%, and 94%, respectively. The most common biopsy site was the pancreas (68%). The most accurate location for EUS-FNA was the esophagus, 13/13 (100%), followed by the pancreas (89.6%). EUS-FNA was least informative for abdominal lymph nodes (70.5%). After FNA and followup, eight false negatives for tumors were found (3%), while 7.5% of samples still lacked a definitive diagnosis. Discussion. QC suggests that the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA might be improved further by (1) taking more FNA passes from suspected lesions, (2) optimizing needle selection (3) having an experienced echo-endoscopist available during the learning curve, and (4) having a cytologist present during the procedure. QC also identified remediable reporting errors. In conclusion, QC study is valuable in identifying weaknesses and thereby augmenting the effectiveness of EUS-FNA.
publisher	Hindawi Publishing Corporation
publishDate	2012
url	https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3503321/
_version_	1611934187741249536

Accuracy and Quality Assessment of EUS-FNA: A Single-Center Large Cohort of Biopsies

Similar Items