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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |
_version_ | 1783490232239259648 |
---|---|
author | Minoda, Yosuke Chinen, Takatoshi Osoegawa, Takashi Itaba, Soichi Haraguchi, Kazuhiro Akiho, Hirotada Aso, Akira Sumida, Yorinobu Komori, Keishi Ogino, Haruei Ihara, Eikichi Ogawa, Yoshihiro |
author_facet | Minoda, Yosuke Chinen, Takatoshi Osoegawa, Takashi Itaba, Soichi Haraguchi, Kazuhiro Akiho, Hirotada Aso, Akira Sumida, Yorinobu Komori, Keishi Ogino, Haruei Ihara, Eikichi Ogawa, Yoshihiro |
author_sort | Minoda, Yosuke |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6975081 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69750812020-01-28 Superiority of mucosal incision-assisted biopsy over ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in diagnosing small gastric subepithelial lesions: a propensity score matching analysis Minoda, Yosuke Chinen, Takatoshi Osoegawa, Takashi Itaba, Soichi Haraguchi, Kazuhiro Akiho, Hirotada Aso, Akira Sumida, Yorinobu Komori, Keishi Ogino, Haruei Ihara, Eikichi Ogawa, Yoshihiro BMC Gastroenterol Research Article 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. BioMed Central 2020-01-21 /pmc/articles/PMC6975081/ /pubmed/31964357 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12876-020-1170-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Minoda, Yosuke Chinen, Takatoshi Osoegawa, Takashi Itaba, Soichi Haraguchi, Kazuhiro Akiho, Hirotada Aso, Akira Sumida, Yorinobu Komori, Keishi Ogino, Haruei Ihara, Eikichi Ogawa, Yoshihiro Superiority of mucosal incision-assisted biopsy over ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in diagnosing small gastric subepithelial lesions: a propensity score matching analysis |
title | Superiority of mucosal incision-assisted biopsy over ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in diagnosing small gastric subepithelial lesions: a propensity score matching analysis |
title_full | Superiority of mucosal incision-assisted biopsy over ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in diagnosing small gastric subepithelial lesions: a propensity score matching analysis |
title_fullStr | Superiority of mucosal incision-assisted biopsy over ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in diagnosing small gastric subepithelial lesions: a propensity score matching analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Superiority of mucosal incision-assisted biopsy over ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in diagnosing small gastric subepithelial lesions: a propensity score matching analysis |
title_short | Superiority of mucosal incision-assisted biopsy over ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in diagnosing small gastric subepithelial lesions: a propensity score matching analysis |
title_sort | superiority of mucosal incision-assisted biopsy over ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in diagnosing small gastric subepithelial lesions: a propensity score matching analysis |
topic | Research Article |
url | 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 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT minodayosuke superiorityofmucosalincisionassistedbiopsyoverultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationbiopsyindiagnosingsmallgastricsubepitheliallesionsapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT chinentakatoshi superiorityofmucosalincisionassistedbiopsyoverultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationbiopsyindiagnosingsmallgastricsubepitheliallesionsapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT osoegawatakashi superiorityofmucosalincisionassistedbiopsyoverultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationbiopsyindiagnosingsmallgastricsubepitheliallesionsapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT itabasoichi superiorityofmucosalincisionassistedbiopsyoverultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationbiopsyindiagnosingsmallgastricsubepitheliallesionsapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT haraguchikazuhiro superiorityofmucosalincisionassistedbiopsyoverultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationbiopsyindiagnosingsmallgastricsubepitheliallesionsapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT akihohirotada superiorityofmucosalincisionassistedbiopsyoverultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationbiopsyindiagnosingsmallgastricsubepitheliallesionsapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT asoakira superiorityofmucosalincisionassistedbiopsyoverultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationbiopsyindiagnosingsmallgastricsubepitheliallesionsapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT sumidayorinobu superiorityofmucosalincisionassistedbiopsyoverultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationbiopsyindiagnosingsmallgastricsubepitheliallesionsapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT komorikeishi superiorityofmucosalincisionassistedbiopsyoverultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationbiopsyindiagnosingsmallgastricsubepitheliallesionsapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT oginoharuei superiorityofmucosalincisionassistedbiopsyoverultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationbiopsyindiagnosingsmallgastricsubepitheliallesionsapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT iharaeikichi superiorityofmucosalincisionassistedbiopsyoverultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationbiopsyindiagnosingsmallgastricsubepitheliallesionsapropensityscorematchinganalysis AT ogawayoshihiro superiorityofmucosalincisionassistedbiopsyoverultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationbiopsyindiagnosingsmallgastricsubepitheliallesionsapropensityscorematchinganalysis |