a 2023

Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesions

ZOUNDJIEKPON, Vincent, Lumír KUNOVSKÝ, Silvia CVEKOVA, Tomas TICHY, Petr VANEK et. al.

Basic information

Original name

Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesions

Authors

ZOUNDJIEKPON, Vincent, Lumír KUNOVSKÝ, Silvia CVEKOVA, Tomas TICHY, Petr VANEK, Peter SLODICKA, Jana ZAPLETALOVA, Namrata GURUNG, Pavel SKALICKY, Premysl FALT and Ondrej URBAN

Edition

European Pancreatic Club 2023, 2023

Other information

Language

English

Type of outcome

Konferenční abstrakt

Field of Study

30219 Gastroenterology and hepatology

Country of publisher

Netherlands

Confidentiality degree

není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství

References:

Impact factor

Impact factor: 3.600 in 2022

Organization unit

Faculty of Medicine

ISSN

DOI

Tags

International impact
Změněno: 30/10/2023 14:18, Mgr. Tereza Miškechová

Abstract

V originále

Background: The differential diagnosis of some pancreatic cystic lesions remains difficult. In these cases, contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound (CE-EUS) was proven to be useful. This study aims to evaluate the accuracy of CE-EUS for diagnosing pancreatic cystic lesions with a suspicion of risk factors for malignancy. Methods: A retrospective analysis of patients with suspected pancreatic cystic neoplasms who underwent a CE-EUS at the University Hospital Olomouc from January 2020 - February 2022 was performed. The final diagnosis of cystic lesion was then confirmed using other cross-sectional imaging methods, cytologic, and biochemical findings by EUS fine needle aspiration, postoperative histology, or the long-term follow-up of the patients. Results: During the study period, EUS was performed in a total of 167 patients with a pancreatic cystic lesion. 29 patients (17.4%) were then referred for CE-EUS for suspected risk features. Enhancement was observed in 9/29 patients (31%), from which 4 patients were operated on with a confirmation of a premalignant or malignant diagnosis. Twenty patients (69%) were without enhancement, from which one patient (5%) was operated on with a confirmation of premalignancy. The remaining 19 patients were referred to follow-up. In this group, 2 (10.5%) patients had a premalignant cystic lesion, and 17 (89.5%) patients had a benign diagnosis. No complications were reported during the procedure. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of CE-EUS were 70%, 89.5%, 77.8%, 85% and 82.8%, respectively. Conclusion: CE-EUS is a feasible and safe method used for the differential diagnosis of suspected pancreatic cystic neoplasms to guide further treatment. However, the results are limited by a low number of provided CE-EUS, and a prospective randomised study with more patients is necessary to confirm these results.