Tumor seeding following endoscopic ultrasonography‐guided fine‐needle aspiration of a celiac lymph node

Anderson, Bradley; Singh, Jaswinder; Jafri, Syed Faisal

doi:10.1111/den.12057

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The incidence of needle tract seeding of the pancreatic cancer was ~0.1%. Recently, several cases with needle tract seeding by EUS‐FNA have been reported 3,21–42 . Yane et al 48 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although a few reports have addressed the adverse events of EUS‐FNA, reinvestigation is required because several new devices to perform EUS‐FNA have been recently developed. Furthermore, the cases of needle tract seeding subsequent to EUS‐FNA have been reported, 3,21–42 and although this adverse event may preoperatively occur, the specific incidence remains unknown. This study aims to clarify the current status of patients who experienced adverse events related to the EUS‐FNA procedure for histopathologic diagnoses.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Adverse events of endoscopic ultrasound‐guided fine‐needle aspiration for histologic diagnosis in Japanese tertiary centers: Multicenter retrospective study

Kanno

Yasuda

Irisawa

et al. 2021

Digestive Endoscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Aims Endoscopic ultrasound‐guided fine‐needle aspiration (EUS‐FNA) is used for the histopathological diagnosis of any type of gastrointestinal disease. Few adverse events are experienced with this procedure; however, the actual rate of adverse events remains unclear. This study aimed to clarify the current status of cases that experienced adverse events related to the EUS‐FNA procedure used for histopathologic diagnoses. Methods A retrospective analysis of cases with EUS‐FNA‐related adverse events in Japanese tertiary centers was conducted by assessing the following clinical data: basic case information, FNA technique, type of procedural adverse events, and prognosis. Results Of the 13,566 EUS‐FNA cases overall, the total number of cases in which adverse events related to EUS‐FNA occurred was 234. The incidence of EUS‐FNA‐related adverse events was ~1.7%. Bleeding and pancreatitis cases accounted for ~49.1% and 26.5% of all adverse events, respectively. Bleeding was the most common adverse event with only seven cases requiring blood transfusion. In cases with neuroendocrine tumors, pancreatitis was the most frequent adverse event. Needle tract seeding because of EUS‐FNA was observed during the follow‐up period in only ~0.1% of cases with pancreatic cancer. There was no mortality because of adverse events caused by EUS‐FNA. Conclusions This study revealed that the adverse events‐related EUS‐FNA for histopathologic diagnoses were not severe conditions, and had low incidence.

show abstract

“…The incidence of needle tract seeding of the pancreatic cancer was ~0.1%. Recently, several cases with needle tract seeding by EUS‐FNA have been reported 3,21–42 . Yane et al 48 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adverse events of endoscopic ultrasound‐guided fine‐needle aspiration for histologic diagnosis in Japanese tertiary centers: Multicenter retrospective study

Kanno

Yasuda

Irisawa

et al. 2021

Digestive Endoscopy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, very few studies have examined other types of mass lesions, such as those affecting the enterocoelia or retroperitoneum, due to the anatomical structural challenges (19,20). Therefore, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA and to investigate the associations of diagnostic findings with various types of mass lesions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in the diagnosis of mass lesions

Han

Lin

Zhang

et al. 2016

Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is an accurate technique for sampling the pancreas and mediastinum; however, limited data are available for other mass lesions. The aim of this study was to explore the value of EUS-FNA in the differential diagnosis of all mass lesions. Data from patients who underwent EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of mass lesions, including pancreatic, mediastinal, celiac and retroperitoneal lesions were retrospectively analyzed. The accuracy was calculated by comparing the results of FNA with the results of pathological examination or follow-up surveillances in non-operated cases. A total of 150 cases were included. The location of the mass varied from the pancreas (n=62) to the mediastinum (n=29), gastrointestinal tract (n=36), celiac cavity and retroperitoneum (n=23). The sensitivity and Youden ' s index of EUS-FNA in the diagnosis of all lesions were 92.97% and 0.93 respectively. The accuracy of diagnosis of pancreatic, mediastinal, gastrointestinal, celiac and retroperitoneal lesions was 85.48, 89.66, 83.33 and 78.23%, respectively. Masses were categorized into parenchymal organs (n=66), luminal organs (n=36) and enlarged lymph nodes (n=33). Lesions in parenchymal organs were likely to be bigger than those in luminal organs (P=0.03) and enlarged lymph nodes (P=0.01). For solid and cystic masses, which constituted 63.3 and 14.7% of the total masses, no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy was observed (P=0.56); however, lesion sizes were significantly different between these two groups (P=0.04) and the majority of cystic masses were identified in women (P=0.03). Malignant lesions were more common in older (P=0.01) and male (P=0.03) patients. In conclusion, EUS-FNA is an effective tool in the diagnosis of unexplained mass lesions; it influences the management of patients by enabling the appropriate treatment to be identified.

show abstract

“…Regardless of the extremely rare occurrence of EUS-FNA-associated seeding metastases, they belong to late serious EUS-FNA-associated complications that may decrease the individual survival [ 7 ]. Thus far, only one multicentric Japanese study with six cases [ 10 ] and twenty-four case reports referring to needle tract seeding metastases of PDAC following EUS-guided sampling have been reported worldwide until 2022 [ 1 , 3 , 7 , 8 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 ]. Moreover, only 20 cases of those documented seeding PDAC metastases have been solved surgically with resection so far [ 3 , 7 , 8 , 10 , 13 , 19 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Isolated Gastric Metastases of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma following Radical Resection—Impact of Endosonography-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration Tract Seeding

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Endosonography-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNA)-associated metachronous gastric seeding metastases (GSM) of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) represent a serious condition with insufficient evidence. Methods: Retrospective analysis of PDAC resections with a curative-intent, proven pathological diagnosis of PDAC, preoperative EUS-FNA and post-resection follow-up of at least 60 months. The systematic literature search of published data was used for the GSM growth evaluation using Pearson correlation and the linear regression analyses. Results: The inclusion criteria met 59/134 cases, 16 (27%) had retained needle tract (15 following distal pancreatectomy, 1 following pylorus-sparing head resection). In total, 3/16 cases (19%) developed identical solitary GSM (10–26th month following primary surgery) and were radically resected. A total of 30 published cases of PDAC GSM following EUS-FNA were identified. Lesion was resected in 20 distal pancreatectomy cases with complete information in 14 cases. A correlation between the metastasis size and time (r = 0.612) was proven. The regression coefficient b = 0.72 expresses the growth of 0.72 mm per month. Conclusions: The GSM represent a preventable and curable condition. A remarkably high number of GSM following EUS-FNA was identified, leading to follow-up recommendation of EUS-FNA sampled patients. Multimodal management (gastric resection, adjuvant chemotherapy) may prolong survival.

show abstract

Tumor seeding following endoscopic ultrasonography‐guided fine‐needle aspiration of a celiac lymph node

Cited by 13 publications

References 2 publications

Adverse events of endoscopic ultrasound‐guided fine‐needle aspiration for histologic diagnosis in Japanese tertiary centers: Multicenter retrospective study

Adverse events of endoscopic ultrasound‐guided fine‐needle aspiration for histologic diagnosis in Japanese tertiary centers: Multicenter retrospective study

Role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in the diagnosis of mass lesions

Isolated Gastric Metastases of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma following Radical Resection—Impact of Endosonography-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration Tract Seeding

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About