Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters








Language
Year range
1.
Arq. gastroenterol ; 60(3): 364-372, July-Sept. 2023. tab
Article in English | LILACS-Express | LILACS | ID: biblio-1513705

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT Background: Reports of the impact of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic period/2020 on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) are scarce. Objective: We analyzed the impact of the pandemic period/2020 on the demographics, indications, and number of diagnostic EUS (D-EUS) and interventional EUS (I-EUS) procedures performed in a high-volume endoscopy unit compared with the previous non-pandemic period/2019. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of all patients undergoing D-EUS or I-EUS from March 1, 2019, to February 29, 2020 (non-pandemic period/2019) and from March 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021 (pandemic period/2020). Data compared between the study periods included sex, age, comorbidities, EUS findings and diagnosis, need for interventional procedures during EUS, and adverse events (AEs). Results were significant at P<0.05. Results: EUS procedures decreased from 475 in the non-pandemic period/2019 to 289 in the pandemic period/2020, accounting for a 39% reduction. In non-pandemic period/2019, 388 (81.7%) D-EUS and 88 (18.5%) I-EUS were performed, against 206 (71.3%) D-EUS and 83 (28.7%) I-EUS in pandemic period/2020 (P=0.001). Only 5/289 (1.7%) patients had COVID-19. Fewer patients with comorbidities underwent EUS during pandemic period/2020 due to lockdown measures (P<0.001). D-EUS decreased, whereas I-EUS increased (P<0.001). EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) was the most common I-EUS, performed in 83/289 (28.7%) patients in pandemic period/2020, against 88/475 (18.5%) in non-pandemic period/2019 (P=0.001). AEs did not differ significantly between the study periods. Conclusion: Pandemic Period/2020 had a moderate impact on reducing EUS procedures due to the risks involved. Although I-EUS increased, EUS-related AEs did not. Solid and cystic pancreatic tumors remained a major indication for EUS-TA even during the pandemic period/2020.


RESUMO Contexto: Os dados sobre o impacto da pandemia de COVID-19 2020 na ultrassonografia endoscópica (EUS) são escassos. Objetivo: Analisamos o impacto do período pandêmico/2020 na demografia, indicações e número das EUS diagnósticas (D-EUS) e intervencionistas EUS (I-EUS) realizados em uma unidade de endoscopia de alto volume e os comparamos com o período imediatamente anterior não-pandêmico/2019. Métodos: Revisamos retrospectivamente os prontuários de todos os pacientes submetidos a D-EUS ou I-EUS de 1 de março de 2019 a 29 de fevereiro de 2020 (período não-pandêmico/2019) e de 1º de março de 2020 a 28 de fevereiro de 2021 (período da pandemia/2020). Comparamos os dados entre os períodos do estudo incluímos o sexo, idade, comorbidades, achados e diagnóstico da EUS, necessidade de procedimentos intervencionistas durante a EUS e a ocorrência de eventos adversos (EAs). Os resultados foram significativos com P<0,05. Resultados: O número de ecoendoscopias diminuíram de 475 no período não-pandêmico/2019 para 289 no período pandêmico/2020, representando uma redução de 39%. No período não-pandêmico/2019 e pandêmico/2020 foram realizados 388 (81,7%) D-EUS e 88 (18,5%) I-EUS, contra 206 (71,3%) D-EUS e 83 (28,7%) I-EUS, respectivamente (P=0,001). Apenas 5/289 (1,7%) pacientes tinham COVID-19. Menos pacientes com comorbidades realizaram EUS durante o período pandêmico/2020 devido as medidas de bloqueio (P<0,001). D-EUS diminuiu, enquanto I-EUS aumentou (P<0,001). A EUS associada a aquisição tecidual (EUS-AT) foi a I-EUS mais comum, realizada em 83/289 (28,7%) pacientes no período pandêmico/2020, versus 88/475 (18,5%) no período não-pandêmico/2019 (P=0,001). Os EAs não diferiram significativamente entre os períodos do estudo. Conclusão: O período da pandemia/2020 teve impacto moderado na redução da EUS devido aos riscos envolvidos. Embora o I-EUS tenha aumentado, os EAs relacionados ao EUS não aumentaram. Os tumores pancreáticos sólidos e císticos permaneceram como uma das principais indicações para EUS-AT mesmo durante o período pandêmico/2020.

2.
Acta gastroenterol. latinoam ; 38(2): 105-115, jun. 2008. ilus, tab
Article in English | LILACS | ID: lil-503619

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: endoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) allows cytologic and/or histologic diagnosis of lesions within or adjacent to the gastrointestinal tract. However, the amount of tissue obtained with a regular 22 gauge needle is not always satisfactory. With the development of a needle XNA-10J-KB (Shot-Gun) that resembles the automatic liver biopsy needle, it is expected that significant samples be obtained more frequently (core biopsy), optimizing histological analysis. OBJECTIVE: to compare samples obtained with EUS-FNA using 3 different needle systems: GIP, NA-10J-1 and Shot-Gun. METHODS: 19 patients underwent EUS-FNA for diagnosis (5) or tumor staging (14). Mean age was 58.9 years (range 27-82), being 50% men. All patients were submitted to EUS-FNA with the 3 needle models. The Shot-Gun model was "shot" when its tip was near the target inside the lesion, followed by aspiration. Samples were submitted for cytologic and histologic examination. RESULTS: mean lesion size was 3.0 cm (range 0.8-5.5 cm). Final diagnoses were made after surgery or intra-operative biopsy: 13 pancreatic tumors (12 adenocarcinomas and 1 neuroendocrine tumor), 4 chronic pancreatitis, 1 acute pancreatitis, and 1 cholangiocarcinoma. Specimens adequate for cytologic diagnosis were obtained in 13/19 (68. 4%) patients using GIP model, in 14/19 (73.7%) with NA10J-1 model, and in 17/19 (89.5%) with ShotGun, model (p=0.039). Histologic analysis was possible in 10/19 (52.6%) patients using the GIP model, in 14/19 (73.7%) with NA10J-1, and in 17/19 (89.5%) with Shot-Gun, model (p=0.005). Adequate samples for cytologic or histologic assessment in 16/19 (84.2%) patients using the GIP model, in 17/19 (89.5%) with NA10J-1, and in 18/19 (94.7%) with Shot-Gun, model (p=0.223). In two cases biopsies were negative due to very hard tumors. CONCLUSION: the Shot-Gun needle obtained better samples for histological diagnosis than NA10J-1 needle and GIP.


Introducción: la ecografía endoscópica asociada a la punción guiada con aguja fina (EUS-FNA) permite el examen citológico y/o diagnóstico histológico de las lesiones dentro o junto al tracto gastrointestinal. Sin embargo, la cantidad de tejido obtenido con una aguja de calibre 22 G no es siempre satisfactoria. Con el desarrollo de una aguja XNA-10J-KB (Shot-Gun®) que seasemeja a la biopsia hepática automática como una aguja especial, se espera que se obtengan muestras importantes con más frecuencia permitindo optimizar el mejor análisis histopatológico. Objetivo: comparar lasmuestras obtenidas con EUS-FNA con 3 diferentes sistemas de aguja: GIP ®, NA-10J-1 ® y Shot-Gun ®. Métodos: 19 pacientes fueron sometidos a EUS-FNApara el diagnóstico (5) para el análisis de las etapas del tumor (14). La edad media fue de 58,9 años (rango 27-82), siendo el 50% hombres. Todos los pacientes fueron sometidos a EUS-FNA con los 3 modelos de aguja. Del Shot-Gun ® fue "disparada" su punta cuandoestaba cerca de la meta en el interior de la lesión, seguida de aspiración. Las muestras se sometieron a examencitológico e histológico. Resultados: el promedio de tamaño de la lesión fue de 3,0 cm (rango 0,8-5,5 cm). Los diagnósticos definitivos fueron hechos después de la cirugía o la biopsia intra-operatoria: 13 tumores de páncreas (12 adenocarcinomas y 1 tumor neuroendócrino), 4 de pancreatitis crónica, 1 de pancreatitis aguda, y 1 de colangiocarcinoma. Las muestras adecuadas para el diagnóstico citológico se obtuvieron en 13/19 (68,4%) pacientes que utilizan GIP ®, en 14/19 (73,7%) con NA10J-1 ®, y en 17/19 (89,5%) con Shot-Gun® (p = 0,039). El análisis histológico fue posible en 10/19 (52,6%) pacientes que utilizan elGIP®, en 14/19 (73,7%) con NA10J-1 ®, y en 17/19 (89,5%) con Shot-Gun® (p = 0,005). Suficientes muestras para citológico o histológico de evaluación en16/19 (84,2%) pacientes que utilizan el modelo GIP ®, en 17/19 (89,5%) con NA10J-1 ®...


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Biopsy, Fine-Needle/instrumentation , Endosonography/instrumentation , Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology , Pancreatitis/pathology , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Adenocarcinoma , Biopsy, Fine-Needle/methods , Cholangiocarcinoma/pathology , Cholangiocarcinoma , Endosonography/methods , Pancreatic Neoplasms , Pancreatitis , Sensitivity and Specificity , Neuroendocrine Tumors/pathology , Neuroendocrine Tumors , Predictive Value of Tests
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL