The Experts below are selected from a list of 35505 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Moon Han Choi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound guided sampling using core Biopsy Needle as a percutaneous Biopsy rescue for diagnosis of solid liver mass combined histological cytological analysis
    Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 2015
    Co-Authors: Jong Ho Moon, Hyun Jong Choi, Moon Han Choi
    Abstract:

    Background and Study Aims Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine Needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is one of the alternative methods for tissue sampling of liver solid mass. However, the diagnostic efficacy using cytology alone was limited. In this study, we evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided fine Needle Biopsy (EUS-FNB) as a percutaneous Biopsy rescue for liver solid mass. Patients and Methods The EUS-FNB using core Biopsy Needle for liver solid mass was performed prospectively for patients who were failure to acquire a tissue or achieve a diagnosis using percutaneous liver Biopsy. The primary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB for malignancy and specific tumor type. The secondary outcomes were the median numbers of passes required to establish a diagnosis, the proportions of patients in whom immunohistochemical (IHC) stain was possible and obtained adequate specimen, and safety of EUS-FNB. Results Twenty-one patients (12 women; mean age, 63 years [range, 37–81]) underwent EUS-FNB for solid liver masses. The median number of Needle passes was 2.0 (range, 1–5). On-site cytology and cytology with Papanicolaou stain showed malignancy in 16 patients (76.2%) and 17 patients (81.0%), respectively. In histology with HE stain, 19 patients (90.5%) were diagnosed malignancy and optimal to IHC stain. The overall diagnostic accuracy for malignancy and specific tumor type were 90.5% and 85.7%, respectively. No complications were seen. Conclusions EUS-FNB with core Biopsy Needle for solid liver mass may be helpful in the management of patients who are unable to diagnose using percutaneous liver Biopsy.

  • core Biopsy Needle versus standard aspiration Needle for endoscopic ultrasound guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses a randomized parallel group study
    Endoscopy, 2014
    Co-Authors: Jong Ho Moon, Hyun Jong Choi, Moon Han Choi, Sangheum Park
    Abstract:

    Background and study aims: An endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine Needle Biopsy (EUS-FNB) device using a core Biopsy Needle was developed to improve diagnostic accuracy by simultaneously obtaining cytological aspirates and histological core samples. We prospectively compared the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB with standard EUS-guided fine Needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in patients with solid pancreatic masses. Patients and methods: Between January 2012 and May 2013, consecutive patients with solid pancreatic masses were prospectively enrolled and randomized to undergo EUS-FNB using a core Biopsy Needle or EUS-FNA using a standard aspiration Needle at a single tertiary center. The specimen was analyzed by onsite cytology, Papanicolaou-stain cytology, and histology. The main outcome measure was diagnostic accuracy for malignancy. The secondary outcome measures were: the median number of passes required to establish a diagnosis, the proportion of patients in whom the diagnosis was established with each pass, and complication rates. Results: The overall accuracy of combining onsite cytology with Papanicolaou-stain cytology and histology was not significantly different for the FNB (n = 58) and FNA (n = 58) groups (98.3 % [95 %CI 94.9 % – 100 %] vs. 94.8 % [95 %CI 91.9 % – 100 %]; P = 0.671). Compared with FNA, FNB required a significantly lower median number of Needle passes to establish a diagnosis (1.0 vs. 2.0; P  Conclusions: The overall accuracy of FNB and FNA in patients with solid pancreatic masses was comparable; however, fewer passes were required to establish the diagnosis of malignancy using FNB. This study was registered on the UMIN Clinical Trial Registry (UMIN000014057).

Jong Ho Moon - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound guided sampling using core Biopsy Needle as a percutaneous Biopsy rescue for diagnosis of solid liver mass combined histological cytological analysis
    Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, 2015
    Co-Authors: Jong Ho Moon, Hyun Jong Choi, Moon Han Choi
    Abstract:

    Background and Study Aims Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine Needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is one of the alternative methods for tissue sampling of liver solid mass. However, the diagnostic efficacy using cytology alone was limited. In this study, we evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided fine Needle Biopsy (EUS-FNB) as a percutaneous Biopsy rescue for liver solid mass. Patients and Methods The EUS-FNB using core Biopsy Needle for liver solid mass was performed prospectively for patients who were failure to acquire a tissue or achieve a diagnosis using percutaneous liver Biopsy. The primary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB for malignancy and specific tumor type. The secondary outcomes were the median numbers of passes required to establish a diagnosis, the proportions of patients in whom immunohistochemical (IHC) stain was possible and obtained adequate specimen, and safety of EUS-FNB. Results Twenty-one patients (12 women; mean age, 63 years [range, 37–81]) underwent EUS-FNB for solid liver masses. The median number of Needle passes was 2.0 (range, 1–5). On-site cytology and cytology with Papanicolaou stain showed malignancy in 16 patients (76.2%) and 17 patients (81.0%), respectively. In histology with HE stain, 19 patients (90.5%) were diagnosed malignancy and optimal to IHC stain. The overall diagnostic accuracy for malignancy and specific tumor type were 90.5% and 85.7%, respectively. No complications were seen. Conclusions EUS-FNB with core Biopsy Needle for solid liver mass may be helpful in the management of patients who are unable to diagnose using percutaneous liver Biopsy.

  • core Biopsy Needle versus standard aspiration Needle for endoscopic ultrasound guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses a randomized parallel group study
    Endoscopy, 2014
    Co-Authors: Jong Ho Moon, Hyun Jong Choi, Moon Han Choi, Sangheum Park
    Abstract:

    Background and study aims: An endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine Needle Biopsy (EUS-FNB) device using a core Biopsy Needle was developed to improve diagnostic accuracy by simultaneously obtaining cytological aspirates and histological core samples. We prospectively compared the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB with standard EUS-guided fine Needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in patients with solid pancreatic masses. Patients and methods: Between January 2012 and May 2013, consecutive patients with solid pancreatic masses were prospectively enrolled and randomized to undergo EUS-FNB using a core Biopsy Needle or EUS-FNA using a standard aspiration Needle at a single tertiary center. The specimen was analyzed by onsite cytology, Papanicolaou-stain cytology, and histology. The main outcome measure was diagnostic accuracy for malignancy. The secondary outcome measures were: the median number of passes required to establish a diagnosis, the proportion of patients in whom the diagnosis was established with each pass, and complication rates. Results: The overall accuracy of combining onsite cytology with Papanicolaou-stain cytology and histology was not significantly different for the FNB (n = 58) and FNA (n = 58) groups (98.3 % [95 %CI 94.9 % – 100 %] vs. 94.8 % [95 %CI 91.9 % – 100 %]; P = 0.671). Compared with FNA, FNB required a significantly lower median number of Needle passes to establish a diagnosis (1.0 vs. 2.0; P  Conclusions: The overall accuracy of FNB and FNA in patients with solid pancreatic masses was comparable; however, fewer passes were required to establish the diagnosis of malignancy using FNB. This study was registered on the UMIN Clinical Trial Registry (UMIN000014057).

Luca Barresi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Antonella Maimone - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

Louise M Fanchon - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • evaluation of the tumor registration error in Biopsy procedures performed under real time pet ct guidance
    Medical Physics, 2017
    Co-Authors: Louise M Fanchon, Adytia Apte, Ross C Schmidtlein, E Yorke, Snjezana Dogan, Mathieu Hatt, Dimitris Visvikis, John L Humm, Stephen B Solomon, A Kirov
    Abstract:

    Purpose The purpose of this study is to quantify tumor displacement during real-time PET/CT guided Biopsy and to investigate correlations between tumor displacement and false-negative results. Methods 19 patients who underwent real-time 18F-FDG PET-guided Biopsy and were found positive for malignancy were included in this study under IRB approval. PET/CT images were acquired for all patients within minute prior Biopsy to visualize the FDG-avid region and plan the Needle insertion. The Biopsy Needle was inserted and a post-insertion CT scan was acquired. The two CT scans acquired before and after Needle insertion were registered using a deformable image registration (DIR) algorithm. The DIR deformation vector field (DVF) was used to calculate the mean displacement between the pre-insertion and post-insertion CT scans for a region around the tip of the Biopsy Needle. For 12 patients, one Biopsy core each was tracked during histopathological testing to investigate correlations of the mean displacement between the two CT scans and false-negative or true positive Biopsy results. For 11 patients, two PET scans were acquired; one at the beginning of the procedure, pre-Needle insertion, and an additional one with the Needle in place. The pre-insertion PET scan was corrected for intra-procedural motion by applying the DVF. The corrected PET was compared with the PET post-Needle insertion to validate the correction method. Results The mean displacement of tissue around the Needle between the pre-Biopsy CT and the post-Needle insertion CT was 5.1 mm (min = 1.1 mm, max = 10.9 mm and SD = 3.0 mm). For mean displacements larger than 7.2 mm, the Biopsy cores gave false negative results. Correcting pre-Biopsy PET using the DVF improved the PET/CT registration in 8 out of 11 cases. Conclusions The DVF obtained from DIR of the CT scans can be used for evaluation and correction of the error in Needle placement with respect to the FDG-avid area. Misregistration between the pre-Biopsy PET and the CT acquired with the Needle in place was shown to correlate with false negative Biopsy results. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

  • feasibility of in situ high resolution correlation of tracer uptake with histopathology by quantitative autoradiography of Biopsy specimens obtained under 18f fdg pet ct guidance
    The Journal of Nuclear Medicine, 2015
    Co-Authors: Louise M Fanchon, Ross C Schmidtlein, E Yorke, Snjezana Dogan, Andre L Moreira, Sean Carlin, A Apte, Irene A Burger, Jeremy C Durack
    Abstract:

    Core biopsies obtained using PET/CT guidance contain bound radiotracer and therefore provide information about tracer uptake in situ. Our goal was to develop a method for quantitative autoradiography of Biopsy specimens (QABS), to use this method to correlate 18F-FDG tracer uptake in situ with histopathology findings, and to briefly discuss its potential application. Methods: Twenty-seven patients referred for a PET/CT-guided Biopsy of 18F-FDG–avid primary or metastatic lesions in different locations consented to participate in this institutional review board–approved study, which complied with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Autoradiography of Biopsy specimens obtained using 5 types of Needles was performed immediately after extraction. The response of autoradiography imaging plates was calibrated using dummy specimens with known activity obtained using 2 core-Biopsy Needle sizes. The calibration curves were used to quantify the activity along Biopsy specimens obtained with these 2 Needles and to calculate the standardized uptake value, SUVARG. Autoradiography images were correlated with histopathologic findings and fused with PET/CT images demonstrating the position of the Biopsy Needle within the lesion. Logistic regression analysis was performed to search for an SUVARG threshold distinguishing benign from malignant tissue in liver Biopsy specimens. Pearson correlation between SUVARG of the whole Biopsy specimen and average SUVPET over the voxels intersected by the Needle in the fused PET/CT image was calculated. Results: Activity concentrations were obtained using autoradiography for 20 specimens extracted with 18- and 20-gauge Needles. The probability of finding malignancy in a specimen is greater than 50% (95% confidence) if SUVARG is greater than 7.3. For core specimens with preserved shape and orientation and in the absence of motion, one can achieve autoradiography, CT, and PET image registration with spatial accuracy better than 2 mm. The correlation coefficient between the mean specimen SUVARG and SUVPET was 0.66. Conclusion: Performing QABS on core-Biopsy specimens obtained using PET/CT guidance enables in situ correlation of 18F-FDG tracer uptake and histopathology on a millimeter scale. QABS promises to provide useful information for guiding interventional radiology procedures and localized therapies and for in situ high-spatial-resolution validation of radiopharmaceutical uptake.