ライフサイエンスコーパス: EUS-FNA

1 EUS FNA is more accurate for nodal staging and impacts o

2 EUS FNA resulting in a higher/worse stage than CT (41 pa

3 EUS FNA should be included in the preoperative staging a

4 EUS FNA was more sensitive (83% vs. 29%; P < 0.001) than

5 EUS-FNA accurately and safely evaluates solid peri-intes

6 EUS-FNA as a first test (after CT) has high diagnostic y

7 EUS-FNA established tissue diagnosis in 70% of cases.

8 EUS-FNA is able to detect occult metastasis to the CLNs

9 EUS-FNA sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy was 92%,

10 EUS-FNA was performed in 457 patients with 554 lesions.

11 EUS-FNA was significantly better than CT at detecting di

12 EUS-FNA with histology of the specimens is a sensitive a

13 EUS-FNA, CT, and positron emission tomography detected m

14 ave a more indolent clinical course; and (3) EUS-FNA may be useful for the diagnosis and management o

15 performance characteristics of CT, EUS, and EUS FNA for preoperative nodal staging of esophageal car

16 , and tumor stage determined by CT, EUS, and EUS FNA were associated with treatment decisions (P < 0.

17 re prospectively evaluated with CT, EUS, and EUS FNA.

18 TBNA, EBUS-FNA, and EUS-FNA performed sequentially as a single combined proc

19 e role of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS FNA) in this setting is unclear.

20 , ultrasound-guided, fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) biopsy and were resected.

21 ic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for diagnosis of metastases to the pancreas.

22 opic ultrasound with fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) remain the preferred methods.

23 ic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) was allowed as an alternative procedure.

24 ic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) was evaluated as a single test for the diagnosi

25 ic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration [EUS-FNA]) is capable of sampling lymph nodes for PCR ana

26 graphy-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNA) permits cytological confirmation of EUS finding

27 confirmed in 32 (1.6%) cases, 30 of them by EUS-FNA, and 2 by surgery.

28 EUS-guided fine needle aspiration cytology (EUS-FNA), and the newest emerging application is EUS-gui

29 Minimally invasive EUS-FNA with RT-PCR is capable of detecting expression o

30 The accuracy of EUS-FNA in patients with previously failed biopsy proced

31 negative predictive values, and accuracy of EUS-FNA with histology analysis of the specimens for dia

32 The combination of EUS-FNA and EBUS-FNA (EUS plus EBUS) had higher estimate

33 inal diagnosis was based on a combination of EUS-FNA, surgery and follow-up of minimum 6 months in ne

34 A multicenter prospective evaluation of EUS-FNA for primary diagnosis, staging, and/or follow-up

35 The performance of EUS-FNA for diagnosis of pancreatic metastases was analy

36 The sensitivity of EUS-FNA for pancreatic adenocarcinoma is excellent (more

37 The diagnostic yields of EUS-FNA and CT for detection of metastases to the CLNs w

38 s, and fluorescence in-situ hybridization on EUS-FNA samples may increase the yield and prove to be b

39 ions for EUS, but most of the emphasis is on EUS-FNA and EUS-guided interventions.

40 f 44 cases with resectable tumor on CT scan, EUS-FNA avoided thoracotomy in 14% of cases.

41 , while FDG-PET/CT may be more accurate than EUS-FNA and CT scan for predicting nodal status and comp

42 ng that FDG-PET/CT may be more accurate than EUS-FNA and CT scan for predicting nodal status and comp

43 of previous extrapancreatic cancer underwent EUS-FNA from January/1997 to December/2010.

44 patients from the EBUS-TBNA group underwent EUS-FNA.

45 37 patients underwent EUS-FNA for probable pancreas metastases.

46 When EUS-FNA was compared with EUS size criteria in lymph nod

47 locoregional staging is best performed with EUS-FNA, with CT scan of the thorax and abdomen and FDG-

48 Mediastinal lymph nodes were sampled with EUS-FNA in patients with NSCLC and negative control subj