Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2003 May-Jun;47(3):341-8.
doi: 10.1159/000326531.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of the pancreas. Diagnostic utility and accuracy

Affiliations

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of the pancreas. Diagnostic utility and accuracy

Alaa M Afify et al. Acta Cytol. 2003 May-Jun.

Abstract

Objective: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNAB) is regarded as a safe and reliable procedure for diagnosing and staging of pancreatic neoplasms. This study retrospectively evaluated both the diagnostic utility and accuracy of pancreatic EUS-FNABs and potential cytologic pitfalls when using Diff-Quik stain for on-site evaluation.

Study design: Pancreatic EUS-FNABs performed between 1995 and 1998 were identified from the files of the Department of Pathology. All patients were studied via a linear-array ultrasound endoscope with an FNAB device. Immediate evaluation of the specimen by a pathologist using air-dried slides and Diff-Quik stain was done on all cases. An average of five passes (range, three to nine) were performed. Five cytologic categories were identified: nondiagnostic, benign, atypical, suspicious and malignant. EUS disease staging, histologic correlation and clinical follow-up were reviewed.

Results: Sixty-nine consecutive pancreative FNABs were evaluated in the study period. The patients comprised 38 females and 31 males with a mean age of 65 years (range, 36-83). Histologic correlation was available on 40 patients, and follow-up was available on the remaining 29. The cytologic diagnoses included: 31 malignant, 8 suspicious, 6 atypical, 20 benign and 4 nondiagnostic. Forty-three cases were true positive, 9 were true negative, 2 were false positive, and 11 were false negative. The overall sensitivity was 80% and specificity was 82%.

Conclusion: The study showed that cytologic evaluation of pancreatic EUS-FNABs has 80% sensitivity and 82% specificity. False negative diagnosis was usually due to sampling error. A nondiagnostic cytologic diagnosis should be rendered in the absence of adequate sampling of a lesion. On-site cytologic evaluation of EUS-FNABs aids in guaranteeing specimen adequacy, and the pathologist should be trained to evaluate Diff-Quik-stained samples.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources