医学
仿形(计算机编程)
活检
放射科
计算机科学
操作系统
作者
Mohamad Dbouk,Brenton G. Davis,Matthew Peller,Erika Sloan,Thomas Hollander,Juan Pablo Reyes-Genere,Ahmad Najdat Bazarbashi,Mohammed Ismail,Gabriel Lang,Vladimir Kushnir,Dayna S. Early,Samuel Ballentine,Sun‐Chuan Dai,Abdul Kouanda,Koushik K. Das
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2025.03.1208
摘要
While EUS with fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) of solid pancreatic lesions with or without the use of rapid on-site-evaluation (ROSE) has high diagnostic yield, the utility of ROSE for commercial genomic analysis is unclear. A multicenter retrospective review was conducted of consecutive patients where genomic analysis was requested from EUS-FNB of solid pancreatic lesions, performed with 22g FNB-needles. Data was collected at two academic centers, one that routinely utilizes ROSE to assess adequacy for all EUS-FNB cases (UCSF, n=44) and a second that does not utilize ROSE (Washington University, n=186). The cohort consisted of 230 patients (mean age 67.3 (SD9.8), 52.6% female). There were no significant differences between patient and tumor characteristics/location in the two groups. Adverse events were uncommon and similar between the groups (1.6% vs 0%). Adequacy for genomic evaluation was high and similar between those without and with ROSE (159/186 (85.5%) vs 39/44 (88.6%), p=0.8). Genomic analysis resulted in potentially actionable mutations in a similar number of patients without and with ROSE (18.3% vs 15.9%, p=0.82). However, compared with FNB without ROSE, FNB with ROSE required more than double the procedure time (mean (SD): 21.1 (10) vs 49.7 (20.6) min, p<0.001) and significantly higher number of median needle passes (3 (IQR 2-3) vs 4 (IQR 3-4), p<0.001). While EUS-FNB with ROSE did not have significantly different adequacy for commercial genomic analysis compared to EUS without ROSE, it required significantly more procedure time and needle passes.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI