Usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound‑guided fine needle aspiration for lymphadenopathy
- Authors:
- Published online on: February 2, 2018 https://doi.org/10.3892/ol.2018.7939
- Pages: 4759-4766
-
Copyright: © Tanisaka et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.
Metrics: Total
Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Abstract
Lymphadenopathy may be difficult to diagnose using imaging results alone. Endoscopic ultrasound‑guided fine needle aspiration (EUS‑FNA) may help to diagnose and determine the appropriate management of lymphadenopathy. EUS‑FNA has been used as a safe and less invasive method for obtaining pathologic specimens from extraluminal lesions using endoscopic ultrasound. The present study evaluated the usefulness of EUS‑FNA for lymphadenopathy. Between July 2013 and December 2016, 72 patients undergoing EUS‑FNA for lymphadenopathy that could not be diagnosed solely using imaging were included. The present study evaluated the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, overall accuracy, helpfulness in determining the management of lymphadenopathy and EUS‑FNA‑associated complications. Of the 72 included patients, 8 were diagnosed with benign (inflammatory or reactive) lymphadenopathy. The diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and overall accuracy were 95.3, 100, 100, 72.7 and 95.8%, respectively. While EUS‑FNA of metastatic nodes identified the origin in the majority of cases, the procedure resulted in a different histopathological diagnosis from the previous image‑based diagnosis in 9 patients. Consequently, 2 patients with testicular cancer were administered bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin. An individual with GIST was administered imatinib, and a patient with prostate cancer was administered degarelix (antihormon drug). A total of 5 other patients received palliative medicine due to the change in diagnosis. EUS‑FNA also helped determine the appropriate cancer management plan in other patients; specifically, based on the cytology of the metastatic lymph node, EUS‑FNA helped determine the cancer stage, and to identify recurrence or the primary cancer from which tissue could not be collected. No EUS‑FNA‑associated symptoms were reported. To conclude, the present study suggested that EUS‑FNA of suspected metastatic lymph nodes appears safe and useful for cancer staging and diagnosing recurrence. It may also useful for diagnosing patients whose collection of samples from the original cancer appeared impractical. EUS‑FNA for lymphadenopathy that may not be diagnosed with imaging alone may assist in diagnosis and help to determine the appropriate management strategy.
