Cargando…

Superiority of mucosal incision-assisted biopsy over ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in diagnosing small gastric subepithelial lesions: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND: Gastric subepithelial lesions, including gastrointestinal stromal tumors, are often found during routine gastroscopy. While endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNAB) has been the gold standard for diagnosing gastric subepithelial lesions, alternative open biop...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Minoda, Yosuke, Chinen, Takatoshi, Osoegawa, Takashi, Itaba, Soichi, Haraguchi, Kazuhiro, Akiho, Hirotada, Aso, Akira, Sumida, Yorinobu, Komori, Keishi, Ogino, Haruei, Ihara, Eikichi, Ogawa, Yoshihiro
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6975081/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31964357
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12876-020-1170-2
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Gastric subepithelial lesions, including gastrointestinal stromal tumors, are often found during routine gastroscopy. While endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNAB) has been the gold standard for diagnosing gastric subepithelial lesions, alternative open biopsy procedures, such as mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB) has been reported useful. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of MIAB for the diagnosis of gastric SELs compared with EUS-FNAB. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed medical records of 177 consecutive patients with gastric SELs who underwent either MIAB or EUS-FNAB at five hospitals in Japan between January 2010 and January 2018. Diagnostic yield, procedural time, and adverse event rates for the two procedures were evaluated before and after propensity-score matching. RESULTS: No major procedure-related adverse events were observed in either group. Both procedures yielded highly-accurate diagnoses once large enough samples were obtained; however, such successful sampling was more often accomplished by MIAB than by EUS-FNAB, especially for small SELs. As a result, MIAB provided better diagnostic yields for SELs smaller than 20-mm diameter. The diagnostic yields of both procedures were comparable for SELs larger than 20-mm diameter; however, MIAB required significantly longer procedural time (approximately 13 min) compared with EUS-FNAB. CONCLUSIONS: Although MIAB required longer procedural time, it outperformed EUS-FNAB when diagnosing gastric SELs smaller than 20-mm diameter.