» Articles » PMID: 20171632

Accuracy of EUS in the Evaluation of Small Gastric Subepithelial Lesions

Overview
Date 2010 Feb 23
PMID 20171632
Citations 75
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: EUS combined with endoluminal resection techniques is increasingly used to provide a definitive diagnosis of small gastric subepithelial lesions seen on standard upper endoscopy.

Objective: To evaluate the accuracy of EUS in diagnosing small gastric subepithelial lesions by using histology as the criterion standard.

Design: A retrospective study.

Setting: Academic tertiary care center.

Patients: A total of 22 patients (15 women, mean age 62.2 years) with an endoscopically resected gastric subepithelial lesion were included in this 3-year retrospective study.

Main Outcome Measurements: The size, echogenicity, the layer of origin, and presumptive diagnosis were determined by EUS. The diagnostic accuracy of EUS was determined by using histology as the criterion standard.

Results: The mean size of the 22 lesions was 13.6 mm (range 8-20 mm). An endoscopic cap band mucosectomy device was used to resect 16 (72.7%) lesions, whereas 6 (27.3%) were resected with a saline solution-assisted and snare technique. Using histology as a criterion standard, we found that the accuracy of the EUS diagnosis was 10 of 22 (45.5%). EUS alone had an accuracy rate of 30.8% and 66.7%, respectively, in the diagnosis of neoplastic and non-neoplastic lesions.

Limitations: A single-center, retrospective analysis.

Conclusion: EUS imaging had a low accuracy rate in the diagnosis of gastric subepithelial lesions, and endoscopic submucosal resection should be performed to provide a histologic diagnosis. Resection of small subepithelial lesions of 20 mm or less can be accomplished en bloc with an endoscopic cap band mucosectomy device.

Citing Articles

The progression rate and risk factor analysis of small gastric subepithelial tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Dong X, Gao L, Liu K, Bai J, Dong J, Fang N Surg Endosc. 2025; 39(2):730-740.

PMID: 39753931 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-024-11496-1.


Correlation of preoperative CT features with intra- and postoperative parameters of endoscopic resection in patients with gastric submucosal tumor (1~3 cm).

Chen Y, Chen M, Wang Z, Wu J, Yang J, Yang L Surg Endosc. 2024; 39(1):259-268.

PMID: 39528660 DOI: 10.1007/s00464-024-11349-x.


Efficacy of EUS-guided keyhole biopsies in diagnosing subepithelial lesions of the upper gastrointestinal tract.

Verhoeve S, Verloop C, Bruno M, Terpstra V, van Driel L, Perk L Endosc Int Open. 2024; 12(10):E1183-E1189.

PMID: 39411358 PMC: 11479790. DOI: 10.1055/a-2417-0580.


Efficacy of real-time artificial intelligence-aid endoscopic ultrasonography diagnostic system in discriminating gastrointestinal stromal tumors and leiomyomas: a multicenter diagnostic study.

Dong Z, Zhao X, Zheng H, Zheng H, Chen D, Cao J EClinicalMedicine. 2024; 73:102656.

PMID: 38828130 PMC: 11137341. DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2024.102656.


Efficacy and histologic frequencies of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided tissue acquisition using conventional fine-needle aspiration needles for gastric subepithelial hypoechoic mass.

Akahoshi K, Tamura S, Akahoshi K, Shiratsuchi Y, Koga H, Oya M Australas J Ultrasound Med. 2024; 27(2):89-96.

PMID: 38784701 PMC: 11109998. DOI: 10.1002/ajum.12382.