Controversies in EUS: Do we need miniprobes?

Seifert, H.; Fusaroli, Pietro; Arcidiacono, Paolo Giorgio; Braden, Barbara; Herth, Felix J.F.; Hocke, Michael; Larghi, Alberto; Napoléon, Bertrand; Rimbaș, Mihai; Ungureanu, Bogdan Silvio; Săftoiu, Adrian; Sahai, Anand V.; Dietrich, Christoph F.

doi:10.4103/eus-d-20-00252

Cited by 18 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 255 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, in the guidelines for ESD and endoscopic mucosal resection for early gastric cancer, it is suggested that EUS may be useful as an additional diagnostic modality 3 . With the background of still unsatisfactory and complicated classification systems, EUS is still considered as an easy‐to‐use and complemental tool 20 . Further studies are needed to determine which type of lesion is necessary to undergo EUS examination before treatment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The factors influencing the accuracy of pre‐operative endoscopic ultrasonography assessment in endoscopic treatments for gastrointestinal tumors

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the factors influencing the accuracy of Endoscopic Ultrasonography (EUS) as a preoperative assessment for gastrointestinal tumors. Methods: A total of 261 patients with 264 gastrointestinal tumors were enrolled in the study. The parameters of the gastrointestinal lesions examined under EUS and their pathology were recorded and analyzed. Results:The accuracy of EUS for detecting intramucosal lesions and subepithelial lesions (SELs) were 83.6% and 91.4%, respectively. One hundred and ninety-four (73.5%) lesions originated from the mucous layer, as determined by pre-operation EUS examinations. The accuracy of EUS in predicting the correct T stage for intramucosal lesions in the gastric region, esophagus, and colorectum was 77%, 71.8%, and 84.6%, respectively. According to the Paris endoscopic classification, the distribution of macroscopic patterns was different between the EUS-pathology conformity and nonconformity groups (p = 0.018). In the nonconformity group, 48.6% of erosive lesions were classified as 0-IIc, 0-IIa + IIc, 0-IIc + IIa or 0-III macroscopic patterns compared with 26% patients in the conformity group (p = 0.025). Univariate analyses demonstrated that ulcerative lesions (OR = 7.516, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 2.574-21.952, p < 0.001), location at the cardia of the stomach (OR = 3.619, 95%CI 1.076-12.168, p = 0.038), malignant tumor (OR = 2.920, 95%CI 1.339-6.368, p = 0.007) were significantly associated with EUS inaccuracy. Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that ulcer was an independent risk factor associated with EUS inaccuracy, with odds ratios of 5.094 (95% CI: 1.641-15.807, p = 0.005). Conclusions:Our findings suggested that EUS is a reliable and easy-to-use diagnostic tool in decision-making regarding appropriate endoscopic treatment for gastrointestinal tumors. However, the diagnostic accuracy of EUS appeared questionable in the presence of ulceration.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The factors influencing the accuracy of pre‐operative endoscopic ultrasonography assessment in endoscopic treatments for gastrointestinal tumors

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 2021, a paper summarized the commercially available EUS-MPs and the multiple studies on their use on the gastrointestinal tract[ 22 ]. Hurlstone et al [ 23 ] reported the use of 12.5 MHz miniprobe ultrasonography for identifying cancer or broad-based polyps in the colon and rectum of 131 consecutive patients.…”

Section: Eus Examination Of Amnsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond boundaries: Feasibility of curved linear array echoendoscope in appendiceal neoplasm detection

Daba,

Altonbary

2024

World J Gastrointest Endosc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We recently read with great interest a study by Zhang et al in the World Journal of Gastroenterology . In our practice, we focus specifically on examining appendiceal mucinous neoplasms (AMNs) with endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) using different scopes. AMNs are rare neoplastic lesions characterized by an accumulation of mucin inside a cystic dilatation of the appendix. Clinically, they can present as nonspecific acute appendicitis. AMNs can turn into a life-threatening condition, termed pseudomyxoma peritonei, in which the ruptured appendix causes accumulation of mucin in the abdomen. Therefore, accurate and rapid diagnosis of AMN is essential. EUS is able to confirm and stage AMNs; although, EUS examination was once limited to the rectal and anal regions due to the conventional oblique-view scopes. With the emergence of new forward-view linear echoendoscopes and instruments like EUS miniprobes and overtubes, the scope of examination is changing. Herein, we discuss the feasibility of using the curved linear array echoendoscopes to examine cecal and appendiceal orifice lesions.

show abstract

“…This technology is based on the premise that some diseases (such as cancer) cause changes in tissue hardness. 23 EUS-E is performed using conventional EUS probes, without additional instruments or real-time calculation of tissue distribution. The examination results are expressed in color superimposed on the traditional B-mode image, generally in blue for the hard tissue structure and in red for the soft tissue structure.…”

Section: Diagnostic Value Of Eus-derived Technologies For Colorectal ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic value of endoscopic ultrasonography in pelvic masses with bowel involvement

She

Guo

2023

Therap Adv Gastroenterol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Benign and malignant pelvic masses with or without intestinal invasion are common in women of childbearing age. Patients may have nonspecific symptoms and signs or experience no symptoms. Laparoscopic resection of pelvic masses is currently the mainstream treatment; therefore, accurate preoperative evaluation is not only essential for patients suspected of having intestinal invasion, but also extremely important for the selection of follow-up treatment. Procedures, including endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), pelvic magnetic resonance imaging, abdominal computed tomography, vaginal ultrasonography, barium enema, and colonoscopy, aid in determining the presence, depth, and histology of the disease. In particular, the wide application and continuous developments in EUS techniques have improved the diagnostic accuracy for intestinal subepithelial and peripheral organ lesions. This article reviewed the clinical value of EUS in the diagnosis of benign and malignant pelvic masses with bowel involvement.

show abstract

Controversies in EUS: Do we need miniprobes?

Cited by 18 publications

References 255 publications

The factors influencing the accuracy of pre‐operative endoscopic ultrasonography assessment in endoscopic treatments for gastrointestinal tumors

The factors influencing the accuracy of pre‐operative endoscopic ultrasonography assessment in endoscopic treatments for gastrointestinal tumors

Beyond boundaries: Feasibility of curved linear array echoendoscope in appendiceal neoplasm detection

Diagnostic value of endoscopic ultrasonography in pelvic masses with bowel involvement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About