• Users Online:233
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 

 Table of Contents  
REVIEW ARTICLE
Year : 2015  |  Volume : 4  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 299-303

Role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology, viscosity, and carcinoembryonic antigen in pancreatic cyst fluid


1 Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
2 Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

Date of Submission10-Jun-2015
Date of Acceptance18-Jul-2015
Date of Web Publication25-Nov-2015

Correspondence Address:
Samer Alkaade
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, 3635 Vista Avenue, P.O. Box 15250, St. Louis - 63110, Missouri
USA
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2303-9027.170417

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 

Due to the advances and increased utility of abdominal cross-sectional imaging, the diagnosis of pancreatic cysts continues to increase. Many endosonographers, pancreatologists, and surgeons consider endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) to be an essential tool in the management of pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs). EUS can help distinguish between mucinous and nonmucinous lesions and may identify the specific cyst type. EUS achieves these goals by delineating the cyst morphology, identifying high risk stigmata and worrisome features, and through image-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and cyst fluid analysis. However, recent consensus statements have called to question the utility and diminished the role of EUS in this setting. The aim of this review is to assess the role and advances of EUS-FNA in pancreatic cyst fluid analysis, specifically in terms of fluid cytology, viscosity, and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) analysis.

Keywords: Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), cytology, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), fine-needle aspiration (FNA), pancreatic cyst fluid analysis, viscosity


How to cite this article:
Alkaade S, Chahla E, Levy M. Role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology, viscosity, and carcinoembryonic antigen in pancreatic cyst fluid. Endosc Ultrasound 2015;4:299-303

How to cite this URL:
Alkaade S, Chahla E, Levy M. Role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology, viscosity, and carcinoembryonic antigen in pancreatic cyst fluid. Endosc Ultrasound [serial online] 2015 [cited 2019 Sep 18];4:299-303. Available from: http://www.eusjournal.com/text.asp?2015/4/4/299/170417


  Introduction Top


Pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) are increasingly being detected largely due to the growing use of and technological improvements in noninvasive cross-sectional abdominal imaging and because of an aging population. [1],[2],[3],[4] The estimated prevalence of PCL among persons between 40 years and 84 years of age within the United States is 2.5%. [5] However, they are identified in about 3% of the patients undergoing abdominal computed tomography (CT) and approximately 20% of the patients undergoing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). [6],[7] In addition, autopsy studies demonstrate pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) in 25% or more patients. [8] Contrary to most cysts located in other organs, several cysts types that comprise the majority of PCLs have malignant potential. The differential diagnosis of PCLs is broad and includes:

  1. Nonneoplastic cysts with no malignant potential [e.g., serous cystadenomas (SCAs), pseudocysts, retention cysts, lymphoepithelial cysts, and benign epithelial cysts];
  2. Cystic neoplasms [e.g., mucinous lesions: Mucinous cystic neoplasm (MCN) and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN)]; and
  3. Nonmucinous cysts with varying malignant potential [e.g., solid pseudopapillary epithelial neoplasm (SPEN)]. [9]


Accurate distinction is necessary to determine prognosis and guide clinical decision-making. However, distinguishing the cyst type is notably challenging and prone to error. The goal is to prevent patients with benign lesions who have nil or only nominal malignant potential from undergoing unnecessary investigations with the attendant risk and cost. Likewise, there is a need to identify premalignant lesions that warrant initial investigation and surveillance in order to provide early intervention when indicated. Due to the wide array of management strategies, the need for accurate diagnosis is of utmost importance.

While PCLs are often first detected by CT, the diagnostic sensitivity of CT is less than 70% for determining a malignant lesion with a specificity of 87-100%. [10] T2-weighted MRI provides superior soft tissue contrast and is more useful in identifying PCLs. [7] The utility of MRI largely lies in its ability to recognize a communication between cysts and the main pancreatic duct, and when compared to CT it is beneficial through the avoidance of ionizing radiation. [11] Despite recent technological advances, the diagnostic accuracy for PCLs remains low and in the range of 20-80%. [12] EUS further defines the cyst morphology but also suffers from inadequate diagnostic accuracy when based on imaging alone. The ability to obtain cyst fluid and cytology from worrisome areas offers incremental diagnostic sensitivity. [13] The aim of this review is to discuss the role of EUS-guided cyst fluid analysis, focusing on the fluid cytology, viscosity, and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA).


  Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration Top


EUS-guided FNA plays a central role in the differentiation and diagnosis of PCLs. [14] EUS typically provides a detailed evaluation of the overall cyst morphology, cyst wall, and internal contents. While the appearance of different cyst types often overlap, some cysts possess certain morphologic features that may provide greater diagnostic specificity. [15] The EUS morphologic appearance provides a diagnostic accuracy of only 50% in differentiating mucinous from nonmucinous cystic lesions. [16] In addition to providing an initial imaging diagnosis, EUS offers the ability to aspirate fluid and perform biopsy on a solid component if present. [17] Studies have demonstrated that the addition of cyst fluid analysis increases the diagnostic accuracy over EUS imaging alone. [18] Cyst fluid aspiration allows cytological evaluation, determination of fluid viscosity, and assessment of tumor markers, pancreatic enzymes, and DNA analysis. [19]


  Cyst Fluid Cytology Top


Cytological diagnosis of cystic fluid relies on the detection of malignant cells, mucin-containing cells, and glycogen-containing cells. Malignant cells are seen in malignant lesions. In a retrospective study from Massachusetts General Hospital, cytology detected 30% more cancers with high risk imaging features. [20] In another study, cytology was a better predictor of malignancy than the symptoms. [21] Mucin-containing cells are seen in IPMNs and mucinous cystic neoplasia but cannot distinguish between these two cysts types and the absence of mucinous cells does not exclude either entity. The presence of glycogen-containing Periodic acid-Schiff (PAS) cells confirms the diagnosis of a SCA. [22] While some suggest that the lack of epithelial cells on cytologic evaluation suggests a pseudocyst, especially in the presence of an inflammatory smear, as noted it is common for the specimen to contain no epithelial cells, which makes their absence an unreliable criterion for pseudocysts. As a result, diagnosing pseudocyst by cytology remains a diagnosis by exclusion. [23]

While cytological analysis of cyst fluid may provide a specific diagnosis, reliance on cytology is severely hampered by poor diagnostic sensitivity that largely results from the paucicellular sample commonly collected. The poor sample adequacy largely results from the limited shedding of cells from the cyst wall and presence of denuded areas of the epithelium. In addition, certain diagnostic features such as ovarian stroma within MCNs is located deep in the epithelium and never identified from cyst fluid analysis.

In a multicenter prospective study involving 341 patients who underwent EUS-FNA of PCL, 112 patients underwent surgical resection with a gold standard for comparison. This study demonstrated a diagnostic sensitivity of cytology for detecting mucinous lesions of 35% and specificity of 83% patients. The overall accuracy was 59%, which was similar to the overall accuracy of EUS morphology alone. Furthermore, the sensitivity of cytology for diagnosing malignancy in a malignant mucinous cystic lesion was only 22%. [22] Another study by Chebib et al. showed the cytology to be more specific than imaging for detecting malignancy in cysts >3 cm in size. [24]

Other measures may be taken to enhance the cytological yield. Adding cytology brushings may improve the diagnostic accuracy for mucinous lesions of 2 cm or larger in size. In this study, cytobrushing samples from PCLs were significantly more likely to detect intracellular mucin than was FNA alone (62% versus 23%, P = 0.001). [25] Others have shown that direct cyst wall aspiration can improve the cytological diagnostic sensitivity by 29% for mucinous lesions when compared to standard fluid cytology alone. [26] This is typically performed after aspirating the cystic fluid and allowing the cyst wall to collapse for easier sampling. [27] Despite promising preliminary data, the use of intracystic brush cytology and direct cyst wall aspiration are seldom performed. It is the author's opinion that the lack of use largely reflects some uncertainty regarding the added diagnostic sensitivity and technical issues and the potential for adverse events. The diagnostic accuracy is increased up to 90% when cystic fluid tumor marker level, amylase level, and mucin stain are added to cytology. [16]


  Cyst Fluid Viscosity Top


Gross evaluation and inspection of the pancreatic cystic fluid may assist in the diagnosis. [28] The subjective impression that the cystic fluid is thick and viscous and difficult to aspirate into the FNA needle often indicates a high mucin content. Fluid is typically assessed using the "string sign." This clinical test is performed by placing a drop of fluid between the thumb and index finger and determining the length of stretch before disruption of the string. It is simple, free of charge, and can be performed by the endosonographer directly after cyst aspiration.

A recently published study assessed the utility of the string sign for the diagnosis of mucinous pancreatic cysts. It revealed that the string sign was highly specific and improved diagnostic accuracy of pancreatic cyst fluid analysis. In this particular study, a test was considered positive when the string was ≥1 cm in length and lasted for ≥1 s. Combining the string sign with cytology, mucin staining, and CEA levels has led to improvement in the specificity (96%) and sensitivity (90%) for diagnosing mucinous cysts. [29] A study from 2009 suggested that an increased cyst fluid viscosity was associated with malignant or potentially malignant cysts. The median string sign was reported to be 0 mm for benign cysts and 3.5 mm for malignant cysts or cysts harboring malignant potential. A longer stretch implies a higher viscosity and higher mucin content and a higher malignancy potential. [30]

Despite being a promising tool and easy-to-perform test, the string sign remains subjective and prone to variations in interpretation. While we do support the use of the string sign as a soft indicator of a mucinous lesion, we do not feel that this finding alone can be considered diagnostic and we do not favor its use as a potential indicator of malignancy.


  Carcinoembryonic Antigen Top


Given the limitations in cyst fluid cytological analysis and viscosity assessment, cyst fluid tumor markers have emerged to potentially improve the diagnostic accuracy for the detection of malignant or premalignant pancreatic cysts. There are a number of purported tumor markers that have been extensively studied for the aforementioned reason. [15] Most studies pertain to the use of CEA, carbohydrate antigens (CAs) 19-9, CA 15-3, and CA72-4.

The literature has made it clear that markers other than CEA are of very limited utility and for this reason, our focus is on the use of CEA as a tool for potentially discriminating between mucinous and nonmucinous lesions and possibly even identifying malignant lesions. [16],[31] The role of CEA as a potential marker to differentiate between PCLs was first reported in the 1980s. [32],[33] Different cutoffs for CEA ranging from 5 ng/mL to 800 ng/mL have been utilized in multiple studies with varying ranges of sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. [22],[30],[34],[35],[36] The value of different tumor markers was investigated in the Cooperative Pancreatic Cyst Study. In this study, various diagnostic modalities including tumor markers were evaluated with respect to histology as the gold standard. The accuracy of CEA was calculated at 79% using a cutoff of 192 ng/mL. When comparing CEA cyst fluid measurement to other diagnostic modalities, it was concluded that it was more accurate than EUS and cytology in the diagnosis of mucinous cystic lesions. In addition, CEA alone yielded greater accuracy than any other combination of tests. [16] A subsequent study in which 442 pancreatic cyst samples were initially tested for CEA yielded a CEA cutoff of 30 ng/mL to differentiate between mucinous and nonmucinous cysts. [34] This study however, suffered from less than ideal measures to define the diagnostic gold standard and we do not favor its use or suggested CEA threshold. Currently, a cutoff of 192 ng/mL is typically referenced as the standard and approximately 0.2-1.0 mL of cyst fluid is required to perform this test. [37]

Cyst fluid CEA values are typically low in serous cystadenomas and cystic neuroendocrine tumors, and elevated for mucinous lesions. Data do not support the use of CEA for distinguishing premalignant mucinous lesions from those that have undergone malignant transformation. [38] A recent study by Nagashio et al. revealed a potential role for combining CEA and CA125 in an attempt to segregate MCNs from IPMNs but we regard these findings still as preliminary and of uncertain utility. [39]


  Conclusions Top


The detection rate of pancreatic cysts has increased in recent years. Many of these cysts are asymptomatic and discovered incidentally. Pancreatic cyst fluid analysis plays a pivotal role in the workup of pancreatic cysts. Cyst fluid analysis is particularly important when clinical and imaging data are indeterminate. Apart from its diagnostic role as an imaging technique, EUS has the added advantage of allowing aspiration of the cyst contents for analysis. Biochemical analysis of the cystic fluid is an important part of the investigation process in conjunction with a variety of other tests. Measurement of cyst fluid CEA concentration has proven to be of the highest clinical utility. Lately, few studies have focused on cyst fluid DNA analysis and its potential role in the investigation of pancreatic cysts. These emerging markers remain under investigation and are not widely available. There remains a need to do further research to define appropriate diagnostic markers that are cost-effective and have a high yield when investigating PCLs. Various societies and committees advocate often disparate and conflicting recommendations regarding the clinical evaluation of PCLs. The value of any recommendation has been hampered by the paucity of well-designed studies. Nevertheless, the lack of sound data has not prevented some from making sweeping reforms to longstanding and broadly accepted dogma in terms of PCL evaluation. We encourage a maintained role for EUS and cystic fluid analysis in accordance with prior recommendations.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
  References Top

1.
Tanaka M, Fernández-del Castillo C, Adsay V, et al.; International Association of Pancreatology. International consensus guidelines 2012 for the management of IPMN and MCN of the pancreas. Pancreatology 2012;12:183-97.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Scheiman JM, Hwang JH, Moayyedi P. American gastroenterological association technical review on the diagnosis and management of asymptomatic neoplastic pancreatic cysts. Gastroenterology 2015;148:824-48.e22.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Vege SS, Ziring B, Jain R, et al.; Clinical Guidelines Committee; American Gastroenterology Association. American gastroenterological association institute guideline on the diagnosis and management of asymptomatic neoplastic pancreatic cysts. Gastroenterology 2015;148:819-22; quize 12-3.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
de Jong K, Nio CY, Hermans JJ, et al. High prevalence of pancreatic cysts detected by screening magnetic resonance imaging examinations. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010;8:806-11.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Gardner TB, Glass LM, Smith KD, et al. Pancreatic cyst prevalence and the risk of mucin-producing adenocarcinoma in US adults. Am J Gastroenterol 2013;108:1546-50.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Megibow AJ, Baker ME, Gore RM, et al. The incidental pancreatic cyst. Radiol Clin North Am 2011;49:349-59.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Lee KS, Sekhar A, Rofsky NM, et al. Prevalence of incidental pancreatic cysts in the adult population on MR imaging. Am J Gastroenterol 2010;105:2079-84.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Kimura W, Nagai H, Kuroda A, et al. Analysis of small cystic lesions of the pancreas. Int J Pancreatol 1995;18:197-206.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Lee LS. Incidental cystic lesions in the pancreas: Resect? EUS? Follow? Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol 2014;12:333-49.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Jones MJ, Buchanan AS, Neal CP, et al. Imaging of indeterminate pancreatic cystic lesions: A systematic review. Pancreatology 2013;13: 436-42.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
But DY, Poley JW. To fine needle aspiration or not? An endosonographer's approach to pancreatic cystic lesions. Endosc Ultrasound 2014;3:82-90.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Bhutani MS, Gupta V, Guha S, et al. Pancreatic cyst fluid analysis - A review. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 2011;20:175-80.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Sahani DV, Kadavigere R, Saokar A, et al. Cystic pancreatic lesions: A simple imaging-based classification system for guiding management. Radiographics 2005;25:1471-84.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Frossard JL, Amouyal P, Amouyal G, et al. Performance of endosonography-guided fine needle aspiration and biopsy in the diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesions. Am J Gastroenterol 2003;98: 1516-24.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Boot C. A review of pancreatic cyst fluid analysis in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic cyst lesions. Ann Clin Biochem 2014;51:151-66.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Brugge WR, Lewandrowski K, Lee-Lewandrowski E, et al. Diagnosis of pancreatic cystic neoplasms: A report of the cooperative pancreatic cyst study. Gastroenterology 2004;126:1330-6.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Sreenarasimhaiah J. Interventional endoscopic ultrasound: The next frontier in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Am J Med Sci 2009;338:319-24.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Khashab MA, Kim K, Lennon AM, et al. Should we do EUS/FNA on patients with pancreatic cysts? The incremental diagnostic yield of EUS over CT/MRI for prediction of cystic neoplasms. Pancreas 2013;42:717-21.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Jana T, Shroff J, Bhutani MS. Pancreatic cystic neoplasms: Review of current knowledge, diagnostic challenges, and management options. J Carcinog 2015;14:3.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Genevay M, Mino-Kenudson M, Yaeger K, et al. Cytology adds value to imaging studies for risk assessment of malignancy in pancreatic mucinous cysts. Ann Surg 2011;254:977-83.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Ono J, Yaeger KA, Genevay M, et al. Cytological analysis of small branch-duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms provides a more accurate risk assessment of malignancy than symptoms. Cytojournal 2011;8:21.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
van der Waaij LA, van Dullemen HM, Porte RJ. Cyst fluid analysis in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesions: A pooled analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2005;62:383-9.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Centeno BA, Lewandrowski KB, Warshaw AL, et al. Cyst fluid cytologic analysis in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesions. Am J Clin Pathol 1994;101:483-7.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Chebib I, Yaeger K, Mino-Kenudson M, et al. The role of cytopathology and cyst fluid analysis in the preoperative diagnosis and management of pancreatic cysts >3 cm. Cancer Cytopathol 2014;122:804-9.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Al-Haddad M, Gill KR, Raimondo M, et al. Safety and efficacy of cytology brushings versus standard fine-needle aspiration in evaluating cystic pancreatic lesions: A controlled study. Endoscopy 2010;42:127-32.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Hong SK, Loren DE, Rogart JN, et al. Targeted cyst wall puncture and aspiration during EUS-FNA increases the diagnostic yield of premalignant and malignant pancreatic cysts. Gastrointest Endosc 2012;75:775-82.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Kadiyala V, Lee LS. Endosonography in the diagnosis and management of pancreatic cysts. World J Gastrointest Endosc 2015;7:213-23.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Layfield LJ, Ehya H, Filie AC, et al.; Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology. Utilization of ancillary studies in the cytologic diagnosis of biliary and pancreatic lesions: The papanicolaou society of cytopathology guidelines for pancreatobiliary cytology. Diagn Cytopathol 2014;42:351-62.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Bick BL, Enders FT, Levy MJ, et al. The string sign for diagnosis of mucinous pancreatic cysts. Endoscopy 2015;47:626-31.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Leung KK, Ross WA, Evans D, et al. Pancreatic cystic neoplasm: The role of cyst morphology, cyst fluid analysis, and expectant management. Ann Surg Oncol 2009;16:2818-24.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Levy MJ, Clain JE. Evaluation and management of cystic pancreatic tumors: Emphasis on the role of EUS FNA. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2004;2:639-53.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Nishida K, Shiga K, Kato K, et al. Two cases of pancreatic cystadenocarcinoma with elevated CA 19-9 levels in the cystic fluid in comparison with two cases of pancreatic cystadenoma. Hepatogastroenterology 1989;36:442-5.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
Tatsuta M, Iishi H, Ichii M, et al. Values of carcinoembryonic antigen, elastase 1, and carbohydrate antigen determinant in aspirated pancreatic cystic fluid in the diagnosis of cysts of the pancreas. Cancer 1986;57:1836-9.  Back to cited text no. 33
[PUBMED]    
34.
Snozek CL, Mascarenhas RC, O'Kane DJ. Use of cyst fluid CEA, CA19-9, and amylase for evaluation of pancreatic lesions. Clin Biochem 2009;42:1585-8.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
Khalid A, Zahid M, Finkelstein SD, et al. Pancreatic cyst fluid DNA analysis in evaluating pancreatic cysts: A report of the PANDA study. Gastrointest Endosc 2009;69:1095-102.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.
Linder JD, Geenen JE, Catalano MF. Cyst fluid analysis obtained by EUS-guided FNA in the evaluation of discrete cystic neoplasms of the pancreas: A prospective single-center experience. Gastrointest Endosc 2006;64:697-702.  Back to cited text no. 36
    
37.
Rockacy M, Khalid A. Update on pancreatic cyst fluid analysis. Ann Gastroenterol 2013;26:122-7.  Back to cited text no. 37
    
38.
Cizginer S, Turner BG, Bilge AR, et al. Cyst fluid carcinoembryonic antigen is an accurate diagnostic marker of pancreatic mucinous cysts. Pancreas 2011;40:1024-8.  Back to cited text no. 38
    
39.
Nagashio Y, Hijioka S, Mizuno N, et al. Combination of cyst fluid CEA and CA 125 is an accurate diagnostic tool for differentiating mucinous cystic neoplasms from intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms. Pancreatology 2014;14:503-9.  Back to cited text no. 39
    



This article has been cited by
1 Survey Study on the Practice Patterns of the Evaluation and Management of Incidental Pancreatic Cysts
Donevan Westerveld,April Goddard,Nieka Harris,Vikas Khullar,Justin Forde,Peter V. Draganov,Chris E. Forsmark,Dennis Yang
Digestive Diseases and Sciences. 2018;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 Intraperitoneal abscess formation spreading to the liver after endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for abdominal lymphadenopathy
Koji Takahashi,Hiroshi Kashimura,Naoaki Konno,Miyuki Nakagawa,Akari Munakata,Ken Okawara,Yohei Aoki,Takeshi Nihei
Clinical Journal of Gastroenterology. 2018;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
3 Histologic Analysis of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Through the Needle Microforceps Biopsies Accurately Identifies Mucinous Pancreas Cysts
Dennis Yang,Arvind J. Trindade,Patrick Yachimski,Petros Benias,Jose Nieto,Amar Manvar,Sammy Ho,Ashwini Esnakula,Anthony Gamboa,Amrita Sethi,Anand Gupte,Harshit S. Khara,David L. Diehl,Abdul El Chafic,Janak Shah,Christopher E. Forsmark,Peter V. Draganov
Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology. 2018;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
4 Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic pseudocyst drainage with lumen-apposing metal stents or plastic double-pigtail stents: A multifactorial analysis
Nan Ge,Jinlong Hu,Siyu Sun,Enqiang Linghu,Zhendong Jin,Zhaoshen Li
Journal of Translational Internal Medicine. 2017; 5(4): 213
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
5 Incidents and adverse events of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for pancreatic cystic lesions
Chen Du,Ning-Li Chai,En-Qiang Linghu,Hui-Kai Li,Yu-Fa Sun,Wei Xu,Xiang-Dong Wang,Ping Tang,Jing Yang
World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2017; 23(30): 5610
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
6 Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in assessment of detailed structures of pancreatic cystic neoplasms
Chen Du,Ning-Li Chai,En-Qiang Linghu,Hui-Kai Li,Li-Hua Sun,Lei Jiang,Xiang-Dong Wang,Ping Tang,Jing Yang
World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2017; 23(17): 3184
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
7 Serous pancreatic neoplasia, data and review
Christoph F Dietrich,Yi Dong,Christian Jenssen,Valentina Ciaravino,Michael Hocke,Wen-Ping Wang,Eike Burmester,Kathleen Moeller,Nathan SS Atkinson,Paola Capelli,Mirko D’Onofrio
World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2017; 23(30): 5567
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
8 Differentiation of Pancreatic Cyst Types by Analysis of Rheological Behavior of Pancreatic Cyst Fluid
Iyad Khamaysi,Aiman Abu Ammar,Gleb Vasilyev,Arkadii Arinstein,Yehuda Chowers,Eyal Zussman
Scientific Reports. 2017; 7: 45589
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
9 EUS for pancreatic cystic neoplasms: The roadmap to the future is much more than just a few shades of gray
Tejas Kirtane,Manoop S. Bhutani
Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Medicine. 2016; 9(12): 1218
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
10 Randomized controlled study of the safety and efficacy of nitrous oxide-sedated endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for digestive tract diseases
Cai-Xia Wang,Jian Wang,Yuan-Yuan Chen,Jia-Ni Wang,Xin Yu,Feng Yang,Si-Yu Sun
World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2016; 22(46): 10242
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
11 Effects of premedication with Pronase for endoscopic ultrasound of the stomach: A randomized controlled trial
Guo-Xin Wang,Xiang Liu,Sheng Wang,Nan Ge,Jin-Tao Guo,Si-Yu Sun
World Journal of Gastroenterology. 2016; 22(48): 10673
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
   Abstract
  Introduction
   Endoscopic Ultra...
  Cyst Fluid Cytology
  Cyst Fluid Viscosity
   Carcinoembryonic...
  Conclusions
   References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1061    
    Printed25    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded415    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 11    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]