Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
3.6
3.6
Journals
Diagnostics
Special Issues
Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA)—2nd Edition
share announcement

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA)—2nd Edition

A special issue of Diagnostics (ISSN 2075-4418). This special issue belongs to the section "Medical Imaging and Theranostics".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 30 November 2024 | Viewed by 4360

Special Issue Editor

Prof. Dr. Susumu Hijioka

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo 104-0045, Japan
Interests: interventional EUS; EUS-FNA; imaging diagnosis of pancreatobiliary diseases
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues, 

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has become widely used in clinical practice. Primarily, EUS-FNA is used for the histological diagnosis and cytodiagnosis of pancreatic diseases, lymph node lesions, and submucosal tumors. Recently, it has been widely used for hepatic lesions, biliary tract diseases, cystic lesions, and perivascular lesions. Improvements in the use of needles, such as an endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy for genomic panel diagnosis have also been attempted to collect more tissue.

On the other hand, needle tract seeding after EUS-FNA has been sporadically observed in previous reports. Furthermore, the issue of the diagnostic ability in pancreatic carcinoma in situ and micropancreatic carcinoma has also come to light. This Special Issue will focus on the current knowledge, issues, and limitations of EUS-FNA use.

Prof. Dr. Susumu Hijioka
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Diagnostics is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2600 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • EUS-FNA
  • endoscopic ultrasound
  • genomic panel diagnosis
  • precision medicine
  • pancreatic cancer
  • molecular oncology

Related Special Issue

Published Papers (2 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Other

14 pages, 1690 KiB  
Article
Diagnostic Ability of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition Using 19-Gauge Fine-Needle Biopsy Needle for Abdominal Lesions
by Kotaro Takeshita, Susumu Hijioka, Yoshikuni Nagashio, Yuta Maruki, Yuki Kawasaki, Kosuke Maehara, Yumi Murashima, Mao Okada, Go Ikeda, Natsumi Yamada, Tetsuro Takasaki, Daiki Agarie, Hidenobu Hara, Yuya Hagiwara, Kohei Okamoto, Daiki Yamashige, Akihiro Ohba, Shunsuke Kondo, Chigusa Morizane, Hideki Ueno, Yutaka Saito, Yuichiro Ohe and Takuji Okusakaadd Show full author list remove Hide full author list
Diagnostics 2023, 13(3), 450; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13030450 - 26 Jan 2023
Viewed by 1734
Abstract
Attempts at performing endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) with a 19G needle are increasing because histological diagnosis and comprehensive genomic profiling are a necessity. However, the diagnostic ability of the 19G fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle, especially the third-generation FNB needle, is unclear and [...] Read more.
Attempts at performing endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) with a 19G needle are increasing because histological diagnosis and comprehensive genomic profiling are a necessity. However, the diagnostic ability of the 19G fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle, especially the third-generation FNB needle, is unclear and has been retrospectively reviewed. The 19G TopGain needle was used in 147 patients and 160 lesions between September 2020 and December 2021. The technical success rate of the biopsies was 99.4% (159/160). The early adverse event rate was 4.1% (6/147), and moderate or severe adverse event rate occurrence was 2.0% (3/147). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the 19G TopGain needle for 157 lesions with a confirmed diagnosis were 96.7%, 100%, and 96.8%, respectively. Rescue EUS-TA using the 19G TopGain needle was performed for nine lesions, and a successful diagnosis was made in six of these lesions (66.7%). The diagnostic ability of EUS-TA using the third-generation 19G TopGain needle was favorable. However, the use of 19G FNB needles may increase adverse events. Therefore, EUS-TA with a 19G FNB needle is mainly indicated in lesions where comprehensive genomic profiling may be necessary or the diagnosis could not be determined via EUS-TA using the 22G needle. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA)—2nd Edition)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Other

Jump to: Research

11 pages, 1545 KiB  
Systematic Review
Endoscopic Ultrasound Guided Fine Needle Aspiration versus Endoscopic Ultrasound Guided Fine Needle Biopsy for Pancreatic Cancer Diagnosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
by Galab M. Hassan, Louise Laporte, Sarto C. Paquin, Charles Menard, Anand V. Sahai, Benoît Mâsse and Helen Trottier
Diagnostics 2022, 12(12), 2951; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12122951 - 25 Nov 2022
Cited by 9 | Viewed by 1739
Abstract
Introduction: One of the most effective diagnostic tools for pancreatic cancer is endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) or biopsy (EUS-FNB). Several randomized clinical trials have compared different EUS tissue sampling needles for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Objective: To compare the diagnostic accuracy [...] Read more.
Introduction: One of the most effective diagnostic tools for pancreatic cancer is endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) or biopsy (EUS-FNB). Several randomized clinical trials have compared different EUS tissue sampling needles for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Objective: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided FNA as EUS-FNB needles for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer using a systematic review and meta-analysis. Method: A literature review with a meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA guide. The databases of PubMed, Cochrane and Google Scholar were used, including studies published between 2011–2021 comparing the diagnostic yield (diagnostic accuracy or probability of positivity, sensitivity, specificity, predictive value) of EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy. Random effect models allowed estimation of the pooled odds ratio with a confidence interval (CI) of 95%. Results: Nine randomized control trials were selected out of 5802 articles identified. Among these, five studies found no statistically significant difference between the EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB, whereas the other four did. The meta-analysis found EUS-FNB accuracy superior to EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer with a pooled odds ratio of 1.87 (IC 95%: 1.33–2.63). Conclusion: As compared to EUS-FNA, EUS-FNB seems to improve diagnostic accuracy when applied to suspicious pancreatic lesions. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA)—2nd Edition)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-2
Back to TopTop