ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Recent reports have indicated that the time of day may impact the detection rate of abnormal cytology on gynecologic cytology samples. The aim of this study was to determine if procedure time or queue position affected the performance characteristics of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for diagnosing solid pancreatic malignancies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study evaluating patients with solid pancreatic lesions in whom EUS-FNA was performed. Three timing variables were evaluated as surrogate markers for endoscopist fatigue: Procedure start times, morning versus afternoon procedures, and endoscopy queue position. Statistical analyses were performed to determine whether the timing variables predicted performance characteristics of EUS-FNA. RESULTS: We identified 609 patients (mean age: 65.8 years, 52.1% males) with solid pancreatic lesions who underwent EUS-FNA. The sensitivity of EUS-FNA was 100% for procedures that started at 7 AM while cases that started at 4 PM had a sensitivity of 81%. Using start time on a continuous scale, each elapsed hour was associated with a 1.9% decrease in EUS-FNA sensitivity (P = 0.003). Similarly, a 10% reduction in EUS-FNA sensitivity was detected between morning and afternoon procedures (92% vs. 82% respectively, P = 0.0006). A linear regression comparing the procedure start time and diagnostic accuracy revealed a decrease of approximately 1.7% in procedure accuracy for every hour later a procedure was started. A 16% reduction in EUS-FNA accuracy was detected between morning and afternoon procedures (100% vs. 84% respectively, P = 0.0009). When the queue position was assessed, a 2.4% reduction in accuracy was noted for each increase in the queue position (P = 0.013). CONCLUSION: Sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA for solid pancreatic lesions decline with progressively later EUS starting times and increasing numbers of procedures before a given EUS, potentially from endoscopist fatigue and cytotechnologist fatigue.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The currently accepted paradigm is that the false-positive (FP) rate for EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) cytologic analysis of a pancreatic lesion is less than 1%. OBJECTIVE: To assess the FP rate of EUS-FNA in patients who underwent surgical resection for presumed pancreatic cancer. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Tertiary-care referral center. PATIENTS: This study involved 367 patients with solid pancreatic lesions in whom EUS-FNA cytology results were interpreted as positive or suspicious for malignancy, which resulted in subsequent surgical resection. INTERVENTION: Surgical resection. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: The FP diagnosis was defined as EUS-FNA cytology specimens being reported as "positive" or "suspicious for malignancy" but that were later proven to be benign on surgical pathology. RESULTS: The FP rate for EUS-FNA was 4 of 367 (1.1%) when only "positive" cytology findings were interpreted as malignant and 14 of 367 (3.8%) when both suspicious and positive cytology findings were interpreted as malignant. Among the 4 cases falsely interpreted as positive, 1 was falsely diagnosed cytologically as a neuroendocrine tumor and 3 as adenocarcinomas. All FP specimens showed chronic pancreatitis on surgical pathology. The incidence of discordance between cytology and surgical pathology did not change over time (2000-2006: 8/188 [4.3%] vs 2007-2010: 6/179 [3.4%]; P = .79). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study at a single center. CONCLUSION: In a retrospective cohort trial, the FP rate for EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic lesions was 1.1%. Findings of the current study are in line with previous studies that have evaluated the FP cytology rates with EUS-FNA of solid lesions. FP cases transpired primarily as a result of cytologic misinterpretation in the setting of chronic pancreatitis.
