Utility of Elastography with Endoscopic Ultrasonography Shear-Wave Measurement for Diagnosing Chronic Pancreatitis.
Diabetes mellitus
Pancreatitis, chronic
Rosemont classification
Shear wave EUS elastography
Journal
Gut and liver
ISSN: 2005-1212
Titre abrégé: Gut Liver
Pays: Korea (South)
ID NLM: 101316452
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 09 2020
15 09 2020
Historique:
received:
15
05
2019
revised:
20
08
2019
accepted:
12
09
2019
pubmed:
15
11
2019
medline:
14
9
2021
entrez:
14
11
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Rosemont classification (RC) with endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is important for diagnosing chronic pancreatitis (CP) but is based only on subjective judgement. EUS shear wave measurement (EUS-SWM) is a precise modality based on objective judgment, but its usefulness has not been extensively studied yet. This study evaluated the utility of EUS-SWM for diagnosing CP and estimating CP severity by determining the presence of endocrine dysfunction along with diabetes mellitus (DM). Between June 2018 and December 2018, 52 patients who underwent EUS and EUS-SWM were classified into two groups according to RC: non-CP (indeterminate CP and normal) and CP (consistent and suggestive of CP). The EUSSWM value by shear wave velocity was evaluated with a median value. The EUS-SWM value was compared with RC and the number of EUS features. The diagnostic accuracy and cutoff value of EUS-SWM for CP and DM and its sensitivity and specificity were calculated. The EUS-SWM value significantly positively correlated with the RC and the number of EUS features. The EUS-SWM values that were consistent and suggestive of CP were significantly higher than that of normal. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve for the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-SWM for CP was 0.97. The cutoff value of 2.19 had 100% sensitivity and 94% specificity. For endocrine dysfunction in CP, the AUROC was 0.75. The cutoff value of 2.78 had 70% sensitivity and 56% specificity. EUS-SWM provides an objective assessment and can be an alternative diagnostic tool for diagnosing CP. EUS-SWM may also be useful for predicting the presence of endocrine dysfunction.
Sections du résumé
Background/Aims
Rosemont classification (RC) with endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is important for diagnosing chronic pancreatitis (CP) but is based only on subjective judgement. EUS shear wave measurement (EUS-SWM) is a precise modality based on objective judgment, but its usefulness has not been extensively studied yet. This study evaluated the utility of EUS-SWM for diagnosing CP and estimating CP severity by determining the presence of endocrine dysfunction along with diabetes mellitus (DM).
Methods
Between June 2018 and December 2018, 52 patients who underwent EUS and EUS-SWM were classified into two groups according to RC: non-CP (indeterminate CP and normal) and CP (consistent and suggestive of CP). The EUSSWM value by shear wave velocity was evaluated with a median value. The EUS-SWM value was compared with RC and the number of EUS features. The diagnostic accuracy and cutoff value of EUS-SWM for CP and DM and its sensitivity and specificity were calculated.
Results
The EUS-SWM value significantly positively correlated with the RC and the number of EUS features. The EUS-SWM values that were consistent and suggestive of CP were significantly higher than that of normal. The area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve for the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-SWM for CP was 0.97. The cutoff value of 2.19 had 100% sensitivity and 94% specificity. For endocrine dysfunction in CP, the AUROC was 0.75. The cutoff value of 2.78 had 70% sensitivity and 56% specificity.
Conclusions
EUS-SWM provides an objective assessment and can be an alternative diagnostic tool for diagnosing CP. EUS-SWM may also be useful for predicting the presence of endocrine dysfunction.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31722469
pii: gnl19170
doi: 10.5009/gnl19170
pmc: PMC7492489
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
659-664Références
Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Jun;69(7):1251-61
pubmed: 19243769
Gastrointest Endosc. 2010 Mar;71(3):519-26
pubmed: 20189510
Pancreatology. 2014 Nov-Dec;14(6):490-6
pubmed: 25224249
Gastrointest Endosc. 2007 Sep;66(3):501-9
pubmed: 17640639
Endoscopy. 2013 Oct;45(10):781-8
pubmed: 24019131
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Mar;33(3):756-761
pubmed: 28833507
Rev Esp Enferm Dig. 2016 Aug;108(8):450-6
pubmed: 27459032
Gastrointest Endosc. 2007 May;65(6):808-14
pubmed: 17466199
Ann Intern Med. 2004 Nov 16;141(10):753-63
pubmed: 15545675
Digestion. 2005;72(4):207-11
pubmed: 16260866
J Clin Gastroenterol. 2001 Jan;32(1):54-8
pubmed: 11154172
Am J Gastroenterol. 2010 Nov;105(11):2498-503
pubmed: 20606675
Gastrointest Endosc. 2005 Jul;62(1):76-84
pubmed: 15990823
Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2014 Mar;14(2):199-215
pubmed: 24512138
J Gastrointestin Liver Dis. 2006 Mar;15(1):21-6
pubmed: 16680228
Medicine (Baltimore). 2016 Apr;95(14):e3251
pubmed: 27057870
J Gastroenterol. 2017 Jul;52(7):868-874
pubmed: 27995327