摘要
AIM： To report the clinical impact of adrenal endoscop-ic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration （EUS-FNA） in the evaluation of patients with adrenal gland enlargement or mass.METHODS： In a retrospective single-center case-series, patients undergoing EUS-FNA of either adrenal gland from 1997-2011 in our tertiary care center were included. Medical records were reviewed and results of EUS, cytology, adrenal size change on follow-up imag-ing ≥ 6 mo after EUS and any repeat EUS or surgery were abstracted. A lesion was considered benign if： （1） EUS-FNA cytology was benign and the lesion remained 〈 1 cm from its original size on follow-up computed tomography （CT）, magnetic resonance imaging or repeat EUS ≥ 6 mo after EUS-FNA; or （2） subsequent adrenalectomy and surgical pathology was benign. RESULTS： Ninety-four patients had left （n = 90） and/or right （n = 5） adrenal EUS-FNA without adverse events. EUS indications included： cancer staging or suspected recurrence （n = 31）, pancreatic （n = 20）, medi-astinal （n = 10）, adrenal （n = 7）, lung （n = 7） mass or other indication （n = 19）. Diagnoses after adrenal EUS-FNA included metastatic lung （n = 10）, esophageal （n= 5）, colon （n = 2）, or other cancer （n = 8）; benign primary adrenal mass or benign tissue （n = 60）; or was non-diagnostic （n = 9）. Available follow-up confrmed a benign lesion in 5/9 non-diagnostic aspirates and 32/60 benign aspirates. Four of the 60 benign aspirates were later confrmed as malignant by repeat biopsy, follow-up CT, or adrenalectomy. Adrenal EUS-FNA diagnosed metastatic cancer in 24, and ruled out metastasis in 10 patients. For the diagnosis of malignancy, EUS-FNA of either adrenal had sensitivity, specifcity, positive predic-tive value and negative predictive value of 86%, 97%, 96% and 89%, respectively.CONCLUSION： Adrenal gland EUS-FNA is safe, mini-mally invasive and a sensitive technique with signifcant impact in the management of adrenal gland mass or enlargement.
AIM:To report the clinical impact of adrenal endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration(EUS-FNA)in the evaluation of patients with adrenal gland enlargement or mass.METHODS:In a retrospective single-center caseseries,patients undergoing EUS-FNA of either adrenal gland from 1997-2011 in our tertiary care center were included.Medical records were reviewed and results of EUS,cytology,adrenal size change on follow-up imaging≥6 mo after EUS and any repeat EUS or surgery were abstracted.A lesion was considered benign if:(1)EUS-FNA cytology was benign and the lesion remained<1 cm from its original size on follow-up computed tomography(CT),magnetic resonance imaging or repeat EUS≥6 mo after EUS-FNA;or(2)subsequent adrenalectomy and surgical pathology was benign.RESULTS:Ninety-four patients had left(n=90)and/or right(n=5)adrenal EUS-FNA without adverse events.EUS indications included:cancer staging or sus-pected recurrence(n=31),pancreatic(n=20),mediastinal(n=10),adrenal(n=7),lung(n=7)mass or other indication(n=19).Diagnoses after adrenal EUSFNA included metastatic lung(n=10),esophageal(n=5),colon(n=2),or other cancer(n=8);benign primary adrenal mass or benign tissue(n=60);or was non-diagnostic(n=9).Available follow-up confirmed a benign lesion in 5/9 non-diagnostic aspirates and 32/60benign aspirates.Four of the 60 benign aspirates were later confirmed as malignant by repeat biopsy,followup CT,or adrenalectomy.Adrenal EUS-FNA diagnosed metastatic cancer in 24,and ruled out metastasis in 10patients.For the diagnosis of malignancy,EUS-FNA of either adrenal had sensitivity,specificity,positive predictive value and negative predictive value of 86%,97%,96%and 89%,respectively.CONCLUSION:Adrenal gland EUS-FNA is safe,minimally invasive and a sensitive technique with significant impact in the management of adrenal gland mass or enlargement.
