BackgroundTo distinguish between malignant and benign lesions of the thyroid gland histological demonstration is often required since the fine-needle aspiration biopsy method applied pre-operatively has some limitations. In an attempt to improve diagnostic accuracy, markers using immunocytochemistry and immunohistochemistry techniques have been studied, mainly cytokeratin-19 (CK-19), galectin-3 (Gal-3) and Hector Battifora mesothelial-1 (HBME-1). However, current results remain controversial. The aim of the present article was to establish the diagnostic accuracy of CK-19, Gal-3 and HBME-1 markers, as well as their associations, in the differentiation of malignant and benign thyroid lesions.MethodsA systematic review of published articles on MEDLINE and The Cochrane Library was performed. After establishing inclusion and exclusion criteria, 66 articles were selected. The technique of meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy was employed and global values of sensitivity, specificity, area under the summary ROC curve, and diagnostic odds ratio (dOR) were calculated.ResultsFor the immunohistochemistry technique, the positivity of CK-19 for the diagnosis of malignant thyroid lesions demonstrated global sensitivity of 81% and specificity of 73%; for Gal-3, sensitivity of 82% and specificity of 81%; and for HBME-1, sensitivity of 77% and specificity of 83%. The association of the three markers determined sensitivity of 85%, specificity of 97%, and diagnostic odds ratio of 95.1. Similar results were also found for the immunocytochemistry assay.ConclusionThis meta-analysis demonstrated that the three immunomarkers studied are accurate in pre- and postoperative diagnosis of benign and malignant thyroid lesions. Nevertheless, the search for other molecular markers must continue in order to enhance this diagnostic accuracy since the results found still show a persistency of false-negative and false-positive tests.Virtual slidesHttp://www.diagnosticpathology.diagnomx.eu/vs/3436263067345159

No abstract

BACKGROUND For palliation of malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), the gold-standard method of biliary drainage is endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with the placement of metallic stents. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage is an alternative that is typically reserved for cases of ERCP failure. Recently, however, there have been robust randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing EUS-guided drainage and ERCP as primary approaches to MBO. AIM To compare EUS guidance and ERCP in terms of their effectiveness and safety in palliative biliary drainage for MBO. METHODS This was a systematic review and meta-analysis, in which we searched the MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica , and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. Only RCTs comparing EUS and ERCP for primary drainage of MBO were eligible. All of the studies selected provided data regarding the rates of technical and clinical success, as well as the duration of the procedure, adverse events, and stent patency. We assessed the risk of biases using the Jadad score and the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation criteria. RESULTS The database searches yielded 5920 records, from which we selected 3 RCTs involving a total of 222 patients (112 submitted to EUS and 110 submitted to ERCP). In the EUS and ERCP groups, the rate of technical success was 91.96% and 91.81%, respectively, with a risk difference (RD) of 0.00% (95%CI: -0.07, 0.07; P = 0.97; I 2 = 0%). The clinical success was 84.81% and 85.53% in the EUS and ERCP groups, respectively, with an RD of −0.01% (95%CI: -0.12, 0.10; P = 0.90; I 2 = 0%). The mean difference (MD) for the duration of the procedure was -0.12% (95%CI: -8.20, 7.97; P = 0.98; I 2 = 84%). In the EUS and ERCP groups, there were 14 and 25 adverse events, respectively, with an RD of -0.06% (95%CI: -0.23, 0.12; P = 0.54; I 2 = 77%). The MD for stent patency was 9.32% (95%CI: -4.53, 23.18; P = 0.19; I 2 = 44%). The stent dysfunction rate was significantly lower in the EUS group (MD = -0.22%; 95CI:-0.35, -0.08; P = 0.001; I 2 = 0%). CONCLUSION EUS represents an interesting alternative to ERCP for MBO drainage, demonstrating lower stent dysfunction rates compared with ERCP. Technical and clinical success, duration, adverse events and patency rates were similar.

Background and study aims Gastric neoplasms are one of the leading types of cancer in the world and early detection is essential to improve prognosis. Endoscopy is the gold-standard diagnostic procedure and allows adequate treatment in selected cases. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has been reported to safely address most early gastric cancers (EGCs), with high curability rates. However, data on prognostic factors related to ESDs of EGCs are conflicting. Therefore, we aimed to systematically review the available literature and to perform a meta-analysis to identify the relevant prognostic factors in this context. Methods We performed this study according to PRISMA guidelines. Comparative studies assessing the relationship between curative resection or long-term curability rates and relevant prognostic factors were selected. Prognostic factors were demographic data, lesion features (location, morphology of the lesion, size, and depth of invasion), histological findings, Helycobacter pylori (HP) infection, presence of gastric a atrophy and body mass index (BMI). Finally, we also evaluated risk factors related to metachronous gastric neoplasm. Results The initial search retrieved 2829 records among which 46 studies were included for systematic review and meta-analysis. The total sample comprised 28366 patients and 29282 lesions. Regarding curative resection, pooled data showed no significant influence of sex [odds ratio (OR): 1.15 (0,97, 1.36) P = 0.10 I2 = 47 %] , age [OR: 1.00 (0.61, 1.64) P = 1.00 I2 = 58 %], posterior vs non-posterior location [OR: 1.35 (0.81, 2.27) P = 0.25 I2 = 84 %], depressed vs von-depressed macroscopic type[OR: 1.21 (0.99, 1.49) P = 0.07 I2 = 0 %], non-upper vs upper location [OR: 1.41 (0.93, 2.14) P = 0.10 I2 = 77 %] and BMI [OR: 0.84 (0.57; 1.26) P = 0.41 I2 = 0 %]. Differentiated neoplasms presented greater chance of cure compare to undifferentiated [OR: 0.10 (0.07, 0.15) P < 0.00001 I2 = 0 %]. Ulcerated lesions had lower curative rates compared to non-ulcerated [OR: 3.92 (2.81, 5.47) P < 0.00001 I2 = 44 %]. Lesions smaller than 20 mm had greater chance of curative resection [OR: 3.94 (3.25, 4.78) P < 0.00001 I2 = 38 %]. Bleeding during procedure had lower curative rates compared to non-bleeding [OR: 2.13 (1.56, 2.93) P < 0.0001 I2 = 0 %]. Concerning long-term cure, female gender [OR 1.62 (1.33, 1.97) P < 0.00001 I2 = 0 %] and the mucosal over SM1 cancers were protective factors [OR: 0.08 (0.02, 0.39) P = 0.002 I2 = 86 %]. Gastric atrophy [OR: 0.60 (0.45, 0.81) P = 0.0006 I2 = 42 %] and the pepsinogen I/pepsinogen II ratio [OR 2.29 (1.47, 3.57) P = 0.0002 I2 = 0 %] were risk factors to metachronous gastric neoplasm. Conclusions Ulcerated lesions, histology, bleeding and size > 20 mm are prognostic factors concerning curative resection. Regarding long-term cure, female gender and mucosal over SM1 cancer are predictive factors. Gastric atrophy and the pepsinogen ratio are risk factors for metachronous gastric neoplasm.

No abstract