- Browse by Subject
Browsing by Subject "Mediastinum"
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Human aortic allograft: an excellent conduit choice for superior vena cava reconstruction(Springer Nature, 2014-01-15) Spera, Kristyn; Kesler, Kenneth A.; Syed, Amjadullah; Boyd, Jack H.; Surgery, School of MedicineSuperior vena cava (SVC) reconstruction is occasionally required in the treatment of benign and malignant conditions. We report a patient with symptomatic SVC obstruction secondary to mediastinal fibrosis successfully reconstructed with an aortic allograft.Item Rescue Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-Guided Trucut Biopsy Following Suboptimal EUS-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration for Mediastinal Lesions(Editorial Office of Gut and Liver, 2013-03) Cho, Chang-Min; Al-Haddad, Mohammad; LeBlanc, Julia K.; Sherman, Stuart; McHenry, Lee; DeWitt, JohnBackground/Aims Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and Trucut biopsy (TCB) are sensitive techniques for diagnosing mediastinal lesions, but it is unclear how either one or both should be used to obtain a pathologic diagnosis. The objective of our study was to evaluate whether EUS-TCB impacts the diagnosis of mediastinal lesions after the initial on-site review of EUS-FNA specimen suggests a suboptimal result. Methods We enrolled consecutive patients with mediastinal lesions who underwent EUS-TCB during the same procedure if the initial EUS-FNA demonstrated an inadequate FNA sample or suggested that histopathology was required for diagnosis. Diagnostic accuracies between procedures were compared as the main outcome. Results Twenty-seven patients (14 men; median age, 56 years; range, 19 to 82 years) underwent EUS-FNA and EUS-TCB to evaluate a mediastinal lymphadenopathy or mass (n=17), to determine the cancer stage (n=3) or to exclude tumor recurrence or metastasis (n=7). The overall diagnostic accuracies of EUS-FNA and EUS-TCB were 78% and 67%, respectively (p=0.375). The combined diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA plus EUS-TCB was 82%. In six patients with nondiagnostic EUS-FNA, EUS-TCB provided a final diagnosis in one patient (17%). Conclusions In the current series of patients with mediastinal masses or adenopathy, the administration of EUS-TCB following suboptimal results for the on-site cytology review did not increase the diagnostic yield.Item Rescue Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-Guided Trucut Biopsy Following Suboptimal EUS-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration for Mediastinal Lesions(Korean Society of Gastroenterology, 2013) Cho, Chang-Min; Al-Haddad, Mohammad; LeBlanc, Julia K.; Sherman, Stuart; McHenry, Lee; DeWitt, John; Medicine, School of MedicineBackground/aims: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and Trucut biopsy (TCB) are sensitive techniques for diagnosing mediastinal lesions, but it is unclear how either one or both should be used to obtain a pathologic diagnosis. The objective of our study was to evaluate whether EUS-TCB impacts the diagnosis of mediastinal lesions after the initial on-site review of EUS-FNA specimen suggests a suboptimal result. Methods: We enrolled consecutive patients with mediastinal lesions who underwent EUS-TCB during the same procedure if the initial EUS-FNA demonstrated an inadequate FNA sample or suggested that histopathology was required for diagnosis. Diagnostic accuracies between procedures were compared as the main outcome. Results: Twenty-seven patients (14 men; median age, 56 years; range, 19 to 82 years) underwent EUS-FNA and EUS-TCB to evaluate a mediastinal lymphadenopathy or mass (n=17), to determine the cancer stage (n=3) or to exclude tumor recurrence or metastasis (n=7). The overall diagnostic accuracies of EUS-FNA and EUS-TCB were 78% and 67%, respectively (p=0.375). The combined diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA plus EUS-TCB was 82%. In six patients with nondiagnostic EUS-FNA, EUS-TCB provided a final diagnosis in one patient (17%). Conclusions: In the current series of patients with mediastinal masses or adenopathy, the administration of EUS-TCB following suboptimal results for the on-site cytology review did not increase the diagnostic yield.