Endoscopic ultrasound was developed in the early 1980s
to overcome the limitations of transabdominal ultrasound in imaging the
gastrointestinal wall and retroperitoneum. The ultrasound transducer
(positioned at the endoscope tip) is applied directly against the duodenal or
gastric wall. This enhances the image quality by minimizing intervening adipose
tissue and air that must be traversed by the ultrasound. The proximity of the
transducer to the target tissue allows the use of higher frequency ultrasound
and leads to greater image resolution. Accordingly, the use of endoscopic
ultrasound has become routine for diagnosing and staging pancreatic and other
Two types of dedicated instruments are available with which to perform
endoscopic ultrasoundeach has different properties that offer unique
advantages and disadvantages. For both instruments, acoustic coupling is
achieved by filling either the intestinal lumen or a balloon attached to the tip
of the endoscope with water. An oblique forward-viewing fiber or video optic
system is used to help direct instrument passage.
The most commonly used instrument is the radial echoendoscope, which has a
mechanically rotating transducer that provides a 360-degree transverse image.
This image is in a plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the endoscope.
The complete scanning arc and the radial orientation of the image simplify
structure recognition. Operating from 7.5 to 20 MHz, the transducer can be
easily switched from one frequency to another during the endoscopic ultrasound
examination, thus modifying the depth of penetration and image resolution.
A linear echoendoscope, equipped with an electronic array transducer that
produces a sagittal image parallel to the longitudinal axis of the endoscope, is
also available. Operating at 5 and 7.5 MHz, this instrument allows continuous
real-time imaging and guidance of a 19- or 22-gauge needle as it is passed from
the endoscope into a lesion. This feature allows one to perform fine-needle
aspiration (FNA) of peri-intestinal tumors, lymph nodes, and fluid collections.
In a similar fashion, therapeutic interventions such as celiac plexus neurolysis
and pseudocyst draining may be achieved. Doppler and color Doppler are available
and are used to identify vascular structures.
Extensive data indicate that endoscopic ultrasound is a highly sensitive
method for identifying pancreatic neoplasms, with detection rates greater than
90% (Table 1).[2,5-12] In most studies, endoscopic ultrasound has proven
superior to transabdominal ultrasound, computed tomography (CT), endoscopic
retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), and angiography in the detection of
In a study by Rosch and colleagues, endoscopic ultrasound demonstrated
greater sensitivity (99%) and specificity (100%) than abdominal ultrasound
(sensitivity: 67%, specificity: 40%) and CT scan (sensitivity: 77%, specificity:
53%) for detecting pancreatic tumors. Recent studies comparing endoscopic
ultrasound with helical CT, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and
positron-emission tomography have found endoscopic ultrasound to have a greater
sensitivity for identifying pancreatic neoplasms.[5,7,11,15] In another study of
34 patients with elevated levels of CA 19-9 and a normal pancreas according to
transabdominal ultrasound and CT scan, endoscopic ultrasound was 94% accurate in
detecting a pancreatic or biliary neoplasm, with a positive and negative
predictive value of 92% and 100%, respectively.
The advantage of endoscopic ultrasound is even greater for recognizing tumors
that are less than 2 to 3 cm in diameter.[2,7,12,17,18] For pancreatic tumors
less than 2 cm, Yasuda and colleagues found that endoscopic ultrasound had a
detection rate of 100% (ERCP: 57%, transabdominal ultrasound: 29%, CT: 29%, and
angiography: 14%). In another study by Rosch and associates, the diagnostic
sensitivity of endoscopic ultrasound for detecting tumors smaller than 3 cm was
100%, compared with 57% for transabdominal ultrasound and 68% for CT.
Endocrine tumors of the pancreas are rare, with a prevalence of less than 1
per 100,000 persons. Insulinoma, gastrinoma, and nonfunctioning tumor are
most common, while glucagonoma, somatostatinoma, and vipoma are less often
reported (Figure 1). Resection offers the only chance for cure and should be
undertaken whenever possible due to the malignant potential of these tumors.
Preoperative determination of the tumor’s location and extent is necessary
to enable the surgeon to plan the optimal surgical approach. Preoperative
localization is also important because it is difficult to locate these tumors
during surgery in up to 20% of insulinomas and as many as 50% of gastrinomas.
Efforts at tumor localization should be reserved for patients in whom
biochemical studies support the clinical diagnosis of a pancreatic
neuroendocrine tumor and not as part of a screening examination.
The approach to tumor localization is similar for all tumor types. Various
imaging modalities are available for preoperative identification of pancreatic
endocrine tumors. They include transabdominal ultrasound, CT, selective
abdominal angiography, selective venous sampling, radiolabeled somatostatin
analog (octreotide)-receptor scintigraphy (SRS), intraoperative ultrasound, and,
most recently, endoscopic ultrasound.
Endoscopic ultrasound is increasingly being used in the diagnostic evaluation
of endocrine tumors of the pancreas because of its ability to identify small
lesions (Figure 2). Studies report a localization rate of approximately 77% to
93% for insulinomas.[4,20,22-27] In these same studies, CT was able to locate
the tumor in 0% to 20% of patients, and SRS in only 12% to 14%. Insulinomas have
a low density of somatostatin receptors and as a result often go undetected by
SRS. The high detection rate of endoscopic ultrasound for insulinomas is likely
explained by the fact that 99% of insulinomas are confined to the
About 75% to 100% of pancreatic gastrinomas are localized by endoscopic
ultrasound,[4,20,22,25,26,30] but only 0% to 67% of duodenal gastrinomas can be
identified.[20,22,26] Endoscopic ultrasound is comparable to SRS for detecting
pancreatic gastrinomas, and both tests are clearly superior to CT. Even so, both
techniques may miss a significant proportion of duodenal gastrinomas.[20,22,26,31]
This is important, since as many as 30% to 45% of gastrinomas (single or
multiple lesions) are located in parapancreatic locations, most notably the
duodenal wall or lymph nodes. Duodenal wall gastrinomas are commonly missed
by endoscopic ultrasound, despite special attention to this area, unless
previously identified endoscopically. Therefore, the endoscopic ultrasound
examination should always be accompanied by a careful forward- and side-viewing
examination of the duodenal wall.
Endoscopic ultrasound FNA increases the accuracy for detection of pancreatic
endocrine tumors. Accuracy rates of 75% to 80% have been reported.[21,30,32] In
addition, endoscopic ultrasound may also identify multifocal tumors not seen by
other imaging modalities. In a multicenter trial involving 37 patients with
a suspected neuroendocrine pancreatic tumor undetected by transabdominal
ultrasound and CT, the sensitivity and specificity of endoscopic ultrasound for
tumor localization was 82% and 95%, respectively. These tumors had a mean
diameter of 1.4 cm (range: 0.5 to 2.5 cm) and consisted of 31 insulinomas, 7
gastrinomas, and 1 glucagonoma. In this same study, only 27% of these tumors
were identified by angiography. All patients underwent surgical resection, with
36 of 37 patients considered cured based on clinical and laboratory parameters.
The endoscopic ultrasound appearance of neuroendocrine pancreatic tumors is
similar, regardless of the type of tumor. They typically appear as round,
well-delineated, homogenous, echo-poor lesions, with a surrounding hyperechoic
rim. Their appearance can vary with reports of cystic or calcified tumors,
echo-rich lesions, an echo-poor border, or echotexture similar to the
surrounding pancreatic parenchyma.[2,36,37] The endoscopic ultrasound technique
for localizing these tumors is identical to that of adenocarcinomas, except that
a more thorough examination may be needed to find these small lesions.
The parapancreatic region should also be carefully examinednot only to
search for malignant lymph nodes but to look for primary tumors as well.[17,38]
Parapancreatic tumors are more difficult to locate than intrapancreatic tumors;
they may be attached by a pedicle or completely separate from the
pancreas.[25,35] As with other tumors, infiltration into adjacent organs and
vessels should be evaluated. Endoscopic ultrasound FNA helps differentiate
benign parapancreatic lymph nodes from a primary neuroendocrine pancreatic
tumor, a distinction that may be especially difficult to make for insulinomas.[4,23-25,32,39-41]
The cost-effectiveness of endoscopic ultrasound for the preoperative
localization of pancreatic endocrine tumors was recently demonstrated by Bansal
and colleagues in a case-control study. They compared the costs of performing
tumor localization with and without endoscopic ultrasound as part of the
protocol, and found that the use of endoscopic ultrasound significantly reduced
the costs of preoperative staging ($2,620 vs $4,846). The savings occurred
because of both a decrease in the number of angiograms and venous sampling
procedures performed and a reduction in surgical and anesthesia times. The cost
per tumor located was $3,144 when endoscopic ultrasound was used vs $5,628 when
it was not.
Endoscopic ultrasound is an accurate technique for detecting functioning
neuroendocrine pancreatic tumors. We suggest performing an endoscopic ultrasound
in all patients in whom surgery is planned; some practitioners favor its use
only when noninvasive studies detect no metastases and no primary tumor is seen.
We favor this approach even when a lesion has already been identified in order
to detect unsuspected multifocal or metastatic disease. The additional
information obtained by endoscopic ultrasound FNA allows cytologic confirmation
of the diagnosis with reduced false-positive imaging results. It also allows the
surgeon to plan the optimal strategy (ie, tumor enucleation vs pancreatic
resection). More studies are needed, however, to determine the role and utility
of endoscopic ultrasound FNA when noninvasive studies have already localized a
1. DiMagno EP, Buxton JL, Regan PT, et al: Ultrasonic endoscope. Lancet
2. Rosch T, Lorenz R, Braig C, et al: Endoscopic ultrasound in pancreatic
tumor diagnosis. Gastrointest Endosc 37:347-352, 1991.
3. Rosch T, Braig C, Gain J, et al: Staging of pancreatic and ampullary
carcinoma by endoscopic ultrasonography. Comparison with conventional sonography,
computed tomography, and angiography. Gastroenterology 102:188-199, 1992.
4. Rosch T, Lightdale CJ, Botet JF, et al: Localization of pancreatic
endocrine tumors by endoscopic ultrasonography. N Engl J Med 326:1721-1726,
5. Legmann P, Vignaux O, Dousset B, et al: Pancreatic tumors: Comparison of
dual-phase helical CT and endoscopic sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol
6. Snady H, Cooperman A, Siegel J: Endoscopic ultrasonography compared with
computed tomography with ERCP in patients with obstructive jaundice or small
peri-pancreatic mass. Gastrointest Endosc 38:27-34, 1992.
7. Muller MF, Meyenberger C, Bertschinger P, et al: Pancreatic tumors:
Evaluation with endoscopic US, CT and MR imaging. Radiology 190:745-751, 1994.
8. Baron PL, Aabakken LE, Cole DJ, et al: Differentiation of benign from
malignant pancreatic masses by endoscopic ultrasound. Ann Surg Oncol 4:639-643,
9. Akahoshi K, Chijiwa Y, Nakano I, et al: Diagnosis and staging of
pancreatic cancer by endoscopic ultrasound. Br J Radiol 71:492-496, 1998.
10. Yasuda K, Mukai H, Nakajima M, et al: Staging of pancreatic carcinoma by
endoscopic ultrasonography. Endoscopy 25:151-155, 1993.
11. Gouhiri M, Soyer P, Barbagelatta M, et al: Macrocystic serous cystadenoma
of the pancreas: CT and endosonographic features. Abdom Imaging 24:72-74, 1999.
12. Yasuda K, Mukai H, Fujimoto S, et al: The diagnosis of pancreatic cancer
by endoscopic ultrasonography. Gastrointest Endosc 34:1-8, 1988.
13. Bhutani MS, Hawes RH, Baron PL, et al: Utility of endoscopic ultrasound
guided fine needle aspiration in the evaluation of pancreatic masses. Am J
Gastroenterol 90:1599A, 1995.
14. Yasuda K, Tanaka Y, Fujimoto S, et al: Use of endosonography ultrasound
in small pancreatic cancer. Scand J Gastroenterol 19:9-17, 1984.
15. Gress FG, Hawes RH, Savides TJ, et al: Role of endoscopic ultrasound in
the preoperative staging of pancreatic cancer: A large single-center experience.
Gastrointest Endosc 50:786-791, 1999.
16. Deprez PH, Gillard V, Schoonbroodt D, et al: Elevated CA 19-9 levels and
endoscopic ultrasonography. Gastrointest Endosc 47:145A, 1998.
17. Chang KJ, Nguyen P, Erickson RA, et al: The clinical utility of
endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in the diagnosis and staging
of pancreatic carcinoma. Gastrointest Endosc 45:387-393, 1997.
18. Rosch T: Staging of pancreatic cancer: Analysis of literature results.
Gastrointest Endosc Clin North Am 5:735-739, 1995.
19. Rosch T, Lorenz R, Braig C, et al: Endoscopic ultrasound in small
pancreatic tumors. Z Gastroenterol 29:110-115, 1991.
20. Jensen RT, Norton JA: Endocrine neoplasms of the pancreas, in Yamada T,
Alpers DH, Laine L, et al (eds): Textbook of Gastroenterology, 3rd ed, pp
2193-2228. Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 1999.
21. Kassem AM, Rosch T: Endosonographic imaging in pancreatic disease. Tech
Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 2:94-100, 2000.
22. Giovannini M, Seitz JF, Monges G, et al: Fine-needle aspiration cytology
guided by endoscopic ultrasonography: Results in 141 patients. Endoscopy
23. Lightdale CJ, Botet JF, Woodruff JM, et al: Localization of endocrine
tumors of the pancreas with endoscopic ultrasonography. Cancer 68:1815-1820,
24. Glover JR, Shorvon PJ, Lees WR, et al: Endoscopic ultrasound for
localisation of islet cell tumours. Gut 33:108-110, 1992.
25. Palazzo L, Roseau G, Salmeron M: Endoscopic ultrasonography in the
preoperative localization of pancreatic endocrine tumors. Endoscopy
24(suppl 1):350-353, 1992.
26. Ruszniewski P, Amouyal P, Amouyal G, et al: Localization of gastrinomas
by endoscopic ultrasonography in patients with Zollinger-Ellison syndrome.
Surgery 117:629-635, 1995.
27. Zimmer T, Ziegler K, Bader M, et al: Localization of neuroendocrine
tumours of the upper gastrointestinal tract. Gut 35:471-475, 1994.
28. Krudy AG, Doppman JL, Jensen RT, et al: Localization of islet cell tumors
by dynamic CT: Comparison with plain CT, arteriography, sonography, and venous
sampling. Am J Roentgenol 143:585-589, 1984.
29. Krenning EP, Kwekkeboom DJ, Oei HY, et al: Somatostatin receptor
scintigraphy in carcinoids, gastrinomas and Cushing’s syndrome. Digestion
55(suppl 3):54-59, 1994.
30. Bansal R, Kochman ML, Bude R, et al: Localization of neuroendocrine
tumors utilizing linear-array endoscopic ultrasonography. Gastrointest Endosc
31. Gibril F, Jensen RT: Comparative analysis of diagnostic techniques for
localization of gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors. Yale Biol Med
32. Ciaccia D, Harada N, Wiersema MJ, et al: Preoperative localization and
diagnosis of pancreatic and peripancreatic islet cell tumors using endoscopic
ultrasound-guided FNA. Gastrointest Endosc 45:584A, 1997.
33. Fishbeyn VA, Norton JA, Benya RV, et al: Assessment and prediction of
long-term cure in patients with the Zollinger-Ellison syndrome: The best
approach. Ann Intern Med 119:199-206, 1993.
34. Hayashi Y, Nakazawa S, Kimoto E: Clinicopathologic analysis of endoscopic
ultrasonograms in pancreatic mass lesions. Endoscopy 21:121-125, 1989.
35. Rosch T, Lorenz R, Braig C, et al: Preoperative localization of endocrine
tumors of the pancreas: Endoscopic ultrasound is superior to transabdominal
sonography and computed tomography. Gastrointest Endosc 36:199-200, 1990.
36. Bansal R, Tierney W, Carpenter S, et al: Cost effectiveness of endoscopic
ultrasound for preoperative localization of pancreatic endocrine tumors.
Gastrointest Endosc 49:19-25, 1999.
37. Koito K, Namieno T, Nagakawa T, et al: Solitary cystic tumors of the
pancreas: Endoscopic ultrasound-pathologic correlation. Gastrointest Endosc
38. Warshaw AL, Compton CC, Lewandrowski K, et al: Cystic tumors of the
pancreas: New clinical, radiologic, and pathologic observations in 67 patients.
Ann Surg 212:432-443, 1990.
39. Bhutani MS, Dexter D, McKellar DP, et al: Intraoperative endoscopic
ultrasonography in Zollinger-Ellison syndrome. Endoscopy 29:754-756, 1997.
40. Ciaccia D, Al-Assi M, Wiersema MJ, et al: Preoperative localization and
diagnosis of pancreatic and peripancreatic islet cell tumors using endoscopic
ultrasound (EUS) guided fine needle aspiration (FNA): A multicenter experience.
Gastroenterology 114:449A, 1998.
41. Yamada M, Komoto E, Naito Y, et al: Endoscopic ultrasonography in the
diagnosis of pancreatic islet cell tumors. J Ultrasound Med 10:271-276, 1991.
42. Siech M, Tripp K, Schmidt-Rohlfing B, et al: Cystic tumours of the
pancreas: Diagnostic accuracy, pathologic observations and surgical
consequences. Langenbecks Arch Surg 383:56-61, 1998.
43. Sarr MG, Carpenter HA, Prabhakar LP, et al: Clinical and pathologic
correlation of 84 mucinous cystic neoplasms of the pancreas: Can one reliably
differentiate benign from malignant (or premalignant) neoplasms? Ann Surg
44. Wilentz RE, Albores-Saavedra J, Zahurak M, et al: Pathologic examination
accurately predicts prognosis in mucinous cystic neoplasms of the pancreas. Am J
Surg Pathol 23:1320-1327, 1999.
45. Procacci C, Biasiutti C, Carbognin G, et al: Characterization of cystic
tumors of the pancreas: CT accuracy. J Comput Assist Tomogr 23:906-912, 1999.
46. Le Borgne J, de Calan L, Partensky C: Cystadenomas and
cystadenocarcinomas of the pancreas: A multiinstitutional retrospective study of
398 cases. French Surgical Association. Ann Surg 230:152-161, 1999.
47. Sand JA, Hyoty MK, Mattila J, et al: Clinical assessment compared with
cyst fluid analysis in the differential diagnosis of cystic lesions in the
pancreas. Surgery 119:275-280, 1996.
48. Hammel P, Voitot H, Vilgrain V, et al: Diagnostic value of CA 72-4 and
carcinoembryonic antigen determination in the fluid of pancreatic cystic
lesions. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 10:345-348, 1998.
49. Torresan F, Casadei R, Solmi L, et al: The role of ultrasound in the
differential diagnosis of serous and mucinous cystic tumours of the pancreas.
Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 9:169-172, 1997.
50. Carlson SK, Johnson CD, Brandt KR, et al: Pancreatic cystic neoplasms:
The role and sensitivity of needle aspiration and biopsy. Abdom Imaging
51. Gress F, Gottlieb K, Cummings O, et al: Endoscopic ultrasound
characteristic of mucinous cystic neoplasms of the pancreas. Am J Gastroenterol
52. Sperti C, Pasquali C, Guolo P, et al: Serum tumor markers and cyst fluid
analysis are useful for the diagnosis of pancreatic cystic tumors. Cancer
53. Centeno BA, Warshaw AL, Mayo-Smith W, et al: Cytologic diagnosis of
pancreatic cystic lesions. A prospective study of 28 percutaneous aspirates.
Acta Cytol 41:972-980, 1997.
54. Seo DW, Kang GH: Twenty-six cases of mucinous ductal ectasia of the
pancreas. Gastrointest Endosc 50:592-594, 1999.
55. Fukushima N, Mukai K, Kanai Y, et al: Intraductal papillary tumors and
mucinous cystic tumors of the pancreas: Clinicopathologic study of 38 cases.
Human Pathol 28:1010-1017, 1997.
56. Ariyama J, Suyama M, Satoh K, et al: Endoscopic ultrasound and
intraductal ultrasound in the diagnosis of small pancreatic tumors. Abdom
Imaging 23:380-386, 1998.
57. Inui K, Nakazawa S, Yoshino J, et al: Mucin-producing tumor of the
pancreasIntraluminal ultrasonography. Hepatogastroenterology 45:1996-2000,
58. Maeshiro K, Nakayama Y, Yasunami Y, et al: Diagnosis of mucin-producing
tumor of the pancreas by balloon-catheter endoscopic retrograde pancreatographyCompression
study. Hepatogastroenterology 45:1986-1995, 1998.
59. Mallery S, Quirk D, Lewandrowski K, et al: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided
FNA with cyst fluid analysis in pancreatic cystic lesions. Gastrointest Endosc
60. Dancour A, Sosa Valencia L, Molas G, et al: Fine-needle aspiration (FNA)
during sectorial endosonography (ES) is useful for the etiological diagnosis of
pancreatic cysts. Gastroenterology 10:385A, 1996.
61. Wiersema MJ, Vilmann P, Giovannini M, et al: Endosonography-guided
fine-needle aspiration biopsy: Diagnostic accuracy and complication assessment.
Gastroenterology 112:1087-1095, 1997.
62. Greenlee RT, Hill-Harmon MB, Murray T, et al: Cancer statistics, 2001. CA
Cancer J Clin 51:15-36, 2001.
63. Moossa AR, Gamagami RA: Diagnosis and staging of pancreatic neoplasms.
Surg Clin North Am 75:871-890, 1995.
64. Barkin JS, Goldstein JA: Diagnostic approach to pancreatic cancer.
Gastroenterol Clin North Am 28:709-722, 1999.
65. Gress F, Savides T, Zaidi S, et al: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) staging
correlates with survival in patients with pancreatic cancer. Gastrointest Endosc
66. Tio TL, Sie HL, Kallimanis G, et al: Staging of ampullary and pancreatic
carcinoma: Comparison between endosonography and surgery. Gastrointest Endosc
67. Krinsky ML, Binmoeller KF: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided investigational
therapy for pancreatic cancer. Gastrointest Endosc 52(suppl):35-38, 2000.
68. Gress F, Savides T, Cummings O, et al: Radial scanning and linear array
endosonography for staging pancreatic cancer: A prospective randomized
comparison. Gastrointest Endosc 45:138-142, 1997.
69. Palazzo L: Staging of pancreatic carcinoma by endoscopic ultrasonography.
Endoscopy 30(suppl 1):103-107A, 1998.
70. Palazzo L, Roseau G, Gayet B, et al: Endoscopic ultrasonography in the
diagnosis and staging of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Results of a prospective
study with comparison to ultrasonography and CT scan. Endoscopy 25:143-150,
71. Midwinter MJ, Beveridge CJ, Wilsdon JB, et al: Correlation between spiral
computed tomography, endoscopic ultrasonography and findings at operation in
pancreatic and ampullary tumours. Br J Surg 86:189-193, 1999.
72. Megibow AJ, Zhou XH, Rotterdam H, et al: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma: CT
versus MR imaging in the evaluation of resectabilityReport of the Radiology
Diagnostic Oncology Group. Radiology 195:327-332, 1995.
73. Sheridan MB, Ward J, Guthrie JA, et al: Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR
imaging and dual-phase helical CT in the preoperative assessment of suspected
pancreatic cancer: A comparative study with receiver operating characteristic
analysis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 173:585-590, 1999.
74. Foutch PG, Kerr DM, Harlan JR, et al: A prospective, controlled analysis
of endoscopic cytotechniques for diagnosis of malignant biliary strictures. Am J
Gastroenterol 86:577-580, 1991.
75. Rosch T, Lorenz R, Braig C, et al: Endoscopic ultrasonography in
diagnosis and staging of pancreatic and biliary tumors. Endoscopy
24(suppl 1):304-308, 1992.
76. Brugge WR, Lee MJ, Kelsey PB, et al: The use of endoscopic ultrasound to
diagnose malignant portal venous system invasion by pancreatic cancer.
Gastrointest Endosc 43:561-567, 1996.
77. Snady H, Bruckner H, Siegel J, et al: Endoscopic ultrasonographic
criteria of vascular invasion by potentially resectable pancreatic tumors.
Gastrointest Endosc 40:326-333, 1994.
78. Stevens PD, Bhargava S: Endoscopic ultrasonography of the pancreas, in
Gress FG, Bhattacharya I (eds): Endoscopic Ultrasonography, pp 111-125. Malden,
Massachusetts, Blackwell Science, 2001.
79. Tio TL, Tytgat GN, Cikot RJ, et al: Ampullopancreatic carcinoma:
Preoperative TNM classification with endosonography. Radiology 175:455-461,
80. Kaufman AR, Sivak MV Jr: Endoscopic ultrasonography in the differential
diagnosis of pancreatic disease. Gastrointest Endosc 35:214-219, 1989.
81. Giovannini M, Seitz JF, Monges G, et al: Fine-needle aspiration cytology
guided by endoscopic ultrasonography: Results in 141 patients. Endoscopy
82. Chang KJ, Katz KD, Durbin TE, et al: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided
fine-needle aspiration. Gastrointest Endosc 40:694-699, 1994.
83. Vilmann P, Hancke S, Henriksen FW, et al: Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided
fine-needle aspiration biopsy of lesions in the upper gastrointestinal tract.
Gastrointest Endosc 41:230-235, 1995.
84. Wegener M, Adamek RJ, Wedmann B, et al: Endosonographically guided
fine-needle aspiration puncture of paraesophagogastric mass lesions: Preliminary
results. Endoscopy 26:586-591, 1994.
85. Wiersema MJ, Kochman ML, Cramer HM, et al: Endosonography-guided
real-time fine-needle aspiration biopsy. Gastrointest Endosc 40:700-707, 1994.
86. Welch TJ, Sheedy PF II, Johnson CD, et al: CT-guided biopsy: Prospective
analysis of 1,000 procedures. Radiology 171:493-496, 1989.
87. Ferrucci JT, Wittenberg J, Margolies MN, et al: Malignant seeding of the
tract after thin-needle aspiration biopsy. Radiology 130:345-346, 1979.
88. Vilmann P, Jocobsen GK, Henriksen FW, et al: Endoscopic ultrasonography
with guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in pancreatic disease. Gastrointest
Endosc 38:172-173, 1992.
89. Chang KJ, Albers CG, Erickson RA, et al: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided
fine needle aspiration of pancreatic carcinoma. Am J Gastroenterol 89:263-266,
90. Vilmann P, Hancke S, Henriksen FW, et al: Endosonographically-guided fine
needle aspiration biopsy of malignant lesions in the upper gastrointestinal
tract. Endoscopy 25:523-527, 1993.
91. Suits J, Frazee R, Erickson RA: Endoscopic ultrasound and fine needle
aspiration for the evaluation of pancreatic masses. Arch Surg 134:639-643, 1999.
92. Williams DB, Sahai AV, Aabakken L, et al: Endoscopic ultrasound guided
fine needle aspiration biopsy: A large single centre experience. Gut 44:720-726,
93. Gress F, Ikenberry S, Hawes R, et al: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided
fine needle aspiration (FNA) biopsy utilizing linear array and radial scanning
endosonography: Results of diagnostic accuracy and complications. Gastrointest
Endosc 43:421A 1996.
94. Bhutani MS: Endoscopic ultrasound in pancreatic disease. Gastroenterol
Clin North Am 28:747-770, 1999.
95. Bhutani MS, Hawes RH, Baron PL, et al: Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine
needle aspiration of malignant pancreatic lesions. Endoscopy 29:854-858, 1997.
96. Faigel DO, Ginsberg GG, Kadish SL, et al: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)
guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) of extraluminal masses. Gastroenterology
97. Capell MS, Yao F, Cho KC, et al: Lymphoma predominantly involving the
pancreas. Dig Dis Sci 34:942-947, 1989.
98. Namieno T, Koito K, Nagakawa T, et al: Diagnostic features on images in
primary small cell carcinoma of the pancreas. Am J Gastroenterol 92:319-322,
99. Wiersema MJ, Wiersema LM: Endosonography-guided celiac plexus neurolysis.
Gastrointest Endosc 44:656-662, 1996.