SwePub
Sök i LIBRIS databas

  Utökad sökning

onr:"swepub:oai:gup.ub.gu.se/270828"
 

Sökning: onr:"swepub:oai:gup.ub.gu.se/270828" > High clinical impac...

LIBRIS Formathandbok  (Information om MARC21)
FältnamnIndikatorerMetadata
00003466naa a2200361 4500
001oai:gup.ub.gu.se/270828
003SwePub
008240910s2018 | |||||||||||000 ||eng|
024a https://gup.ub.gu.se/publication/2708282 URI
024a https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5808-22 DOI
040 a (SwePub)gu
041 a eng
042 9 SwePub
072 7a ref2 swepub-contenttype
072 7a art2 swepub-publicationtype
100a Hedenström, Peru Gothenburg University,Göteborgs universitet,Institutionen för medicin, avdelningen för invärtesmedicin och klinisk nutrition,Institute of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine and Clinical Nutrition4 aut0 (Swepub:gu)xhperi
2451 0a High clinical impact and diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided biopsy sampling of subepithelial lesions: a prospective, comparative study.
264 c 2017-08-15
264 1b Springer Science and Business Media LLC,c 2018
520 a In a tertiary center setting we aimed to study the diagnostic accuracy and clinical impact of EUS-guided biopsy sampling (EUS-FNB) with a reverse bevel needle compared with that of fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in the work-up of subepithelial lesions (SEL).All patients presenting with SELs referred for EUS-guided sampling were prospectively included in 2012-2015. After randomization of the first pass modality, dual sampling with both EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA was performed in each lesion. Outcome measures in an intention-to-diagnose analysis were the diagnostic accuracy, technical failures, and adverse events. The clinical impact was measured as the performance of additional diagnostic procedures post-EUS and the rate of unwarranted resections compared with a reference cohort of SELs sampled in the same institution 2006-2011.In 70 dual sampling procedures of unique lesions (size: 6-220mm) the diagnostic sensitivity for malignancy and the overall accuracy of EUS-FNB was superior to EUS-FNA compared head-to-head (90 vs 52%, and 83 vs 49%, both p<0.001). The adverse event rate of EUS-FNB was low (1.2%). EUS-FNB in 2012-2015 had a positive clinical impact in comparison with the reference cohort demonstrated by less cases referred for an additional diagnostic procedure, 12/83 (14%) vs 39/73 (53%), p<0.001, and fewer unwarranted resections in cases subjected to surgery, 3/48 (6%) vs 12/35 (34%), p=0.001.EUS-FNB with a reverse bevel needle is safe and superior to EUS-FNA in providing a conclusive diagnosis of subepithelial lesions. This biopsy sampling approach facilitates a rational clinical management and accurate treatment.
650 7a MEDICIN OCH HÄLSOVETENSKAPx Klinisk medicin0 (SwePub)3022 hsv//swe
650 7a MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCESx Clinical Medicine0 (SwePub)3022 hsv//eng
700a Marschall, Hanns-Ulrich,d 19544 aut
700a Nilsson, Bengt E,d 19494 aut
700a Demif, Akir4 aut
700a Lindkvist, Björn4 aut
700a Nilsson, Ola,d 19574 aut
700a Sadik, Riadh,d 19634 aut
710a Göteborgs universitetb Institutionen för medicin, avdelningen för invärtesmedicin och klinisk nutrition4 org
773t Surgical endoscopyd : Springer Science and Business Media LLCg 32:3, s. 1304-1313q 32:3<1304-1313x 1432-2218x 0930-2794
856u https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs00464-017-5808-2.pdf
8564 8u https://gup.ub.gu.se/publication/270828
8564 8u https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-017-5808-2

Hitta via bibliotek

Till lärosätets databas

Sök utanför SwePub

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Stäng

Kopiera och spara länken för att återkomma till aktuell vy