A “back light system” for identification of sites for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in solid pancreatic masses: A prospective, randomized study with a crossover design

Ryo Harada, Hironari Kato, Soichiro Fushimi, Hirofumi Inoue, Daisuke Uchida, Yutaka Akimoto, Takeshi Tomoda, Kazuyuki Matsumoto, Yasuhiro Noma, Naoki Yamamoto, Shigeru Horiguchi, Koichiro Tsutsumi, Hiroyuki Okada

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background/Aims: We applied a back light system (BLS) with a magnifying glass to improve the ability to assess the adequacy of specimen sampling using endosonography. We conducted this study to evaluate the efficacy of the BLS in sampling of specimens by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of solid pancreatic masses. Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, crossover, single-center clinical trial. An endosonographer evaluated adequacy on gross visual inspection and identified whitish specimen sampling sites with and without the BLS according to a randomization sequence in the first and second passes with a 25-G needle. On cytological evaluation, the presence of well-defined pancreatic ductal epithelium was evaluated by a cytopathologist who was blinded to any clinical information. Results: A total of 80 consecutive patients were eligible during the study period. Adequacy was observed for 52 specimens (65%) with the BLS and 54 (68%) without the BLS (p=0.88). In assessment of specimen adequacy on gross examination, only fair agreement was observed both with and without BLS (kappa score 0.40 and 0.29, respectively). Conclusions: The BLS did not influence the ability to identify specimen sampling sites or reliable assessment of specimen site adequacy using gross visual inspection.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)334-339
Number of pages6
JournalClinical Endoscopy
Volume52
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 1 2019

Fingerprint

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration
Cross-Over Studies
Prospective Studies
Light
Endosonography
Random Allocation
Needles
Glass
Epithelium
Clinical Trials

Keywords

  • Cytology
  • Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration
  • Endosonographer
  • Pancreatineoplasms
  • Rapid on-site evaluation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine (miscellaneous)
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Gastroenterology

Cite this

@article{a78e51ba00cb482f87edd7722e44c587,
title = "A “back light system” for identification of sites for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in solid pancreatic masses: A prospective, randomized study with a crossover design",
abstract = "Background/Aims: We applied a back light system (BLS) with a magnifying glass to improve the ability to assess the adequacy of specimen sampling using endosonography. We conducted this study to evaluate the efficacy of the BLS in sampling of specimens by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of solid pancreatic masses. Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, crossover, single-center clinical trial. An endosonographer evaluated adequacy on gross visual inspection and identified whitish specimen sampling sites with and without the BLS according to a randomization sequence in the first and second passes with a 25-G needle. On cytological evaluation, the presence of well-defined pancreatic ductal epithelium was evaluated by a cytopathologist who was blinded to any clinical information. Results: A total of 80 consecutive patients were eligible during the study period. Adequacy was observed for 52 specimens (65{\%}) with the BLS and 54 (68{\%}) without the BLS (p=0.88). In assessment of specimen adequacy on gross examination, only fair agreement was observed both with and without BLS (kappa score 0.40 and 0.29, respectively). Conclusions: The BLS did not influence the ability to identify specimen sampling sites or reliable assessment of specimen site adequacy using gross visual inspection.",
keywords = "Cytology, Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration, Endosonographer, Pancreatineoplasms, Rapid on-site evaluation",
author = "Ryo Harada and Hironari Kato and Soichiro Fushimi and Hirofumi Inoue and Daisuke Uchida and Yutaka Akimoto and Takeshi Tomoda and Kazuyuki Matsumoto and Yasuhiro Noma and Naoki Yamamoto and Shigeru Horiguchi and Koichiro Tsutsumi and Hiroyuki Okada",
year = "2019",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.5946/ce.2019.004",
language = "English",
volume = "52",
pages = "334--339",
journal = "Clinical Endoscopy",
issn = "2234-2400",
publisher = "Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A “back light system” for identification of sites for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in solid pancreatic masses

T2 - A prospective, randomized study with a crossover design

AU - Harada, Ryo

AU - Kato, Hironari

AU - Fushimi, Soichiro

AU - Inoue, Hirofumi

AU - Uchida, Daisuke

AU - Akimoto, Yutaka

AU - Tomoda, Takeshi

AU - Matsumoto, Kazuyuki

AU - Noma, Yasuhiro

AU - Yamamoto, Naoki

AU - Horiguchi, Shigeru

AU - Tsutsumi, Koichiro

AU - Okada, Hiroyuki

PY - 2019/7/1

Y1 - 2019/7/1

N2 - Background/Aims: We applied a back light system (BLS) with a magnifying glass to improve the ability to assess the adequacy of specimen sampling using endosonography. We conducted this study to evaluate the efficacy of the BLS in sampling of specimens by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of solid pancreatic masses. Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, crossover, single-center clinical trial. An endosonographer evaluated adequacy on gross visual inspection and identified whitish specimen sampling sites with and without the BLS according to a randomization sequence in the first and second passes with a 25-G needle. On cytological evaluation, the presence of well-defined pancreatic ductal epithelium was evaluated by a cytopathologist who was blinded to any clinical information. Results: A total of 80 consecutive patients were eligible during the study period. Adequacy was observed for 52 specimens (65%) with the BLS and 54 (68%) without the BLS (p=0.88). In assessment of specimen adequacy on gross examination, only fair agreement was observed both with and without BLS (kappa score 0.40 and 0.29, respectively). Conclusions: The BLS did not influence the ability to identify specimen sampling sites or reliable assessment of specimen site adequacy using gross visual inspection.

AB - Background/Aims: We applied a back light system (BLS) with a magnifying glass to improve the ability to assess the adequacy of specimen sampling using endosonography. We conducted this study to evaluate the efficacy of the BLS in sampling of specimens by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of solid pancreatic masses. Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, crossover, single-center clinical trial. An endosonographer evaluated adequacy on gross visual inspection and identified whitish specimen sampling sites with and without the BLS according to a randomization sequence in the first and second passes with a 25-G needle. On cytological evaluation, the presence of well-defined pancreatic ductal epithelium was evaluated by a cytopathologist who was blinded to any clinical information. Results: A total of 80 consecutive patients were eligible during the study period. Adequacy was observed for 52 specimens (65%) with the BLS and 54 (68%) without the BLS (p=0.88). In assessment of specimen adequacy on gross examination, only fair agreement was observed both with and without BLS (kappa score 0.40 and 0.29, respectively). Conclusions: The BLS did not influence the ability to identify specimen sampling sites or reliable assessment of specimen site adequacy using gross visual inspection.

KW - Cytology

KW - Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration

KW - Endosonographer

KW - Pancreatineoplasms

KW - Rapid on-site evaluation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85070221877&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85070221877&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.5946/ce.2019.004

DO - 10.5946/ce.2019.004

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85070221877

VL - 52

SP - 334

EP - 339

JO - Clinical Endoscopy

JF - Clinical Endoscopy

SN - 2234-2400

IS - 4

ER -