Search

Objectives: To identify factors differentiating pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs) from non-PNET neoplastic solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs) and assess the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA)., Methods: This is a retrospective study at a tertiary center of consecutive patients referred for EUS from 2004 to 2011. The main outcomes were pretest predictors and accuracy of EUS-FNA for diagnosis of PNET., Results: Among a total of 1108 EUS-FNAs for pancreatic lesions, 672 patients (PNET = 91, non-PNET neoplastic-SPLs = 581) had neoplastic-SPLs. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of EUS-FNA for diagnosis of PNETs were 98.9%, 100%, and 99.9%, respectively. The mean needle-passes were 3.0/patient. The EUS volume (mean/year per endosonographer) in preceding 3 years significantly correlated with fewer needle passes (rs: [-0.26]; P = 0.02).Multivariate analysis demonstrated that patients with PNET when compared to non-PNET neoplastic-SPLs were younger (odds ratio [OR], 3.23; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.19-9.09; P = 0.001), have 2 or more pancreatic lesions (OR, 5.63; 95% CI, 1.74-18.2; P = 0.005), and lower CA 19-9 values (OR, 10.0; 95% CI, 3.13-33.3; P = 0.001). Further, PNETs were less likely to have weight loss (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.17-0.90; P = 0.03), current smoking (OR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.22-0.98; P < 0.05), pancreatic ductal dilation (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.13-0.60; P = 0.002), or imaging evidence of arterial invasion (OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.07-0.71; P = 0.01)., Conclusions: Although pre-FNA findings can reliably characterize, EUS-FNA is highly accurate for the diagnosis of PNETs.

Background and Aim: Early diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs) enables prompt treatment. The study aims to identify factors differentiating metastatic lesion to the pancreas (PMET) from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNETs)., Methods: This is a retrospective study at a tertiary cancer center. Consecutive patients referred for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) of SPLs from 2004 to 2011 were reviewed. The main outcomes were pre-EUS-FNA (endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration) predictors and diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA for PMETs., Results: Among a total of 1108 EUS-FNAs for pancreatic lesions, 672 patients had neoplastic SPLs (PMETs = 53; PDACs = 528, PNETs = 91). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and accuracy of EUS-FNA for diagnosis of PMETs were 84.9%, 100%, 100%, and 98.8%, respectively. The mean number of EUS-FNA passes for diagnosis of PMET was 3.1 per patient. For each endosonographer, preceding 3-year EUS volume (mean/year) significantly correlated with fewer needle passes (rs [-0.30], P = 0.03). The most common PMET was renal cell carcinoma. Stratified multivariate analyses were performed. Compared with patients with PDACs, PMETs were more common in men (odds ratio [OR] = 2.0; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.0-4.0); located in the pancreatic tail (OR = 2.4; 95%CI = 1.1-5.2); and were less likely with increasing age (OR = 0.95; 95%CI = 0.92-0.99), presence of major symptoms (abdomen pain/diarrhea/weight loss; OR = 0.2; 95%CI = 0.1-0.4), elevated bilirubin (OR = 0.3; 95%CI = 0.13-0.69), and imaging evidence of arterial invasion (OR = 0.15; 95%CI = 0.03-0.67). Compared with PNETs, PMETs were more common with increase age (OR = 1.05; 95%CI = 1.02-1.08) and increasing lesion size (OR = 1.03; 95%CI = 1.0-1.1), and were less likely in patients with diabetes (OR = 0.34; 95%CI = 0.11-0.99)., Conclusion: Among the largest numbers of neoplastic SPLs evaluated at a single center, pre-test features reliably characterize, and EUS-FNA provides a highly specific diagnosis of PMETs., (© 2015 Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Foundation and Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.)

Background: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNET), and metastatic lesions (pMET) are the most common neoplastic solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs). Early diagnosis enables prompt treatment., Objective: To identify factors differentiating PDAC from non-PDAC lesions and assess the accuracy of EUS-guided FNA., Design and Setting: Retrospective tertiary center., Patients and Intervention: Consecutive patients referred for EUS evaluation of SPLs from 2004 to 2011., Main Outcome Measurements: Pretest (preceding EUS-guided FNA [EUS-FNA]) predictors of PDAC among neoplastic SPLs and accuracy of EUS-FNA., Results: A total of 1333 EUS scans with 1108 EUS-FNAs were performed for pancreatic lesions. Of the 672 patients with neoplastic SPLs, 528 had PDAC and 144 non-PDAC. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and accuracy of EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of PDAC were 97.3%, 99.3%, 99.8%, and 97.8%, respectively. Years of EUS experience significantly correlated with fewer needle passes (Rs = -0.18, P < .001). Controlling for all potential confounders, multivariable regression analysis demonstrated that patients with PDAC compared with pNETs and pMETs were older (odds ratio [OR] 4.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-9.5; P < .001), had weight loss (OR 3.0; 95% CI, 1.6-5.4; P < .001), hyperbilirubinemia (OR 3.7; 95% CI, 1.8-7.5; P < .001), elevated CA19-9 (OR 6.9; 95% CI, 2.4-20.3; P < .01), evidence of arterial invasion (OR 6.5; 95% CI, 2.7-15.4; P < .001), and PD dilation (OR 3.3; 95% CI, 1.8-5.9; P < .001)., Limitations: Retrospective design, single center., Conclusions: When evaluating neoplastic SPLs, demographic, clinical, laboratory, and imaging characteristics can reliably discern and suggest PDAC. In addition, EUS-FNA is exceedingly sensitive and specific for PDAC., (Copyright © 2015 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)