Prospective evaluation of advanced molecular markers and imaging techniques in patients with indeterminate bile duct strictures

American Journal of Gastroenterology

Volumn 103, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 1263-1273

  Levy, Michael J ^a,b   Baron, Todd H ^a   Clayton, Amy C ^a   Enders, Felicity B ^a   Gostout, Christopher J ^a   Halling, Kevin C ^a   Kipp, Benjamin R ^a   Petersen, Bret T ^a   Roberts, Lewis R ^a   Rumalla, Ashwin ^a   Sebo, Thomas J ^a   Topazian, Mark D ^a   Wiersema, Maurits J ^a   Gores, Gregory J ^a  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^b Mayo Clinic   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BILE DUCT CANCER; BILE DUCT OBSTRUCTION; BIOPSY; CYTOLOGY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DIGITAL IMAGE ANALYSIS; DISEASE SEVERITY; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; EVALUATION; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FEMALE; FLUORESCENCE IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PREDICTION; PRIMARY SCLEROSING CHOLANGITIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TRISOMY 7;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANEUPLOIDY; BILE DUCT NEOPLASMS; BILE DUCTS; BIOPSY; CHOLANGIOGRAPHY; CHOLANGITIS, SCLEROSING; CHOLESTASIS; CHROMOSOME ABERRATIONS; DNA, NEOPLASM; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION, FLUORESCENCE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, INTERVENTIONAL;

EID: 43549101589     PISSN: 00029270     EISSN: 15720241     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01776.x     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Hann LE, Winston CB, Brown KT, et al. Diagnostic imaging approaches and relationship to hepatobiliary cancer staging and therapy. Semin Surg Oncol 2000 19 : 94 115.
2. Pugliese V, Conio M, Nicolo G, et al. Endoscopic retrograde forceps biopsy and brush cytology of biliary strictures: A prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc 1995 42 : 520 6.
3. Schoefl R, Haefner M, Wrba F, et al. Forceps biopsy and brush cytology during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for the diagnosis of biliary stenoses. Scand J Gastroenterol 1997 32 : 363 8.
4. Glasbrenner B, Ardan M, Boeck W, et al. Prospective evaluation of brush cytology of biliary strictures during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Endoscopy 1999 31 : 712 7.
5. Ryan ME, Baldauf MC. Comparison of flow cytometry for DNA content and brush cytology for detection of malignancy in pancreaticobiliary strictures [see comment]. Gastrointest Endosc 1994 40 : 133 9.
6. Ryan ME. Cytologic brushings of ductal lesions during ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc 1991 37 : 139 42.
7. de Bellis M, Sherman S, Fogel EL, et al. Tissue sampling at ERCP in suspected malignant biliary strictures (Part 2). Gastrointest Endosc 2002 56 : 720 30.
8. De Bellis M, Sherman S, Fogel EL, et al. Tissue sampling at ERCP in suspected malignant biliary strictures (Part 1). Gastrointest Endosc 2002 56 : 552 61.
9. Tamada K, Ueno N, Tomiyama T, et al. Characterization of biliary strictures using intraductal ultrasonography: Comparison with percutaneous cholangioscopic biopsy. Gastrointest Endosc 1998 47 : 341 9.
10. Menzel J, Domschke W. Gastrointestinal miniprobe sonography: The current status [review]. Am J Gastroenterol 2000 95 : 605 16.
11. Vazquez-Sequeiros E, Baron TH, Clain JE, et al. Evaluation of indeterminate bile duct strictures. Gastrointest Endosc 2002 53 : 372 9.
12. Tamada K, Nagai H, Yasuda Y, et al. Transpapillary intraductal US prior to biliary drainage in the assessment of longitudinal spread of extrahepatic bile duct carcinoma. Gastrointest Endosc 2001 53 : 300 7.
13. Sebo TJ. Digital image analysis. Mayo Clin Proc 1995 70 : 81 2.
14. Halling KC, King W, Sokolova IA, et al. A comparison of cytology and fluorescence in situ hybridization for the detection of urothelial carcinoma. J Urol 2000 164 : 1768 75.
15. Sokolova IA, Halling KC, Jenkins RB, et al. The development of a multitarget, multicolor fluorescence in situ hybridization assay for the detection of urothelial carcinoma in urine. J Mol Diagn 2000 2 : 116 23.
16. Persons DL, Takai K, Gibney DJ, et al. Comparison of fluorescence in situ hybridization with flow cytometry and static image analysis in ploidy analysis of paraffin-embedded prostate adenocarcinoma. Hum Pathol 1994 25 : 678 83.
17. Kristal AR, Baker MS, Flaherty MJ, et al. A pilot study of DNA aneuploidy in colorectal adenomas and risk of adenoma recurrence. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1995 4 : 347 52.
18. van den Ingh HF, Griffioen G, Cornelisse CJ. DNA aneuploidy in colorectal adenomas. Br J Cancer 1987 55 : 351.
19. Banner BF, Chacho MS, Roseman DL, et al. Multiparameter flow cytometric analysis of colon polyps. Am J Clin Pathol 1987 87 : 313 8.
20. Yeaton P, Kiss R, Deviere J, et al. Use of cell image analysis in the detection of cancer from specimens obtained during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Am J Clin Pathol 1993 100 : 497 501.
21. Lanigan D, McLean PA, Curran B, et al. Comparison of flow and static image cytometry in the determination of ploidy. J Clin Pathol 1993 46 : 135 9.
22. Kipp BR, Sebo TJ, Griffin MD, et al. Analysis of polyomavirus-infected renal transplant recipients' urine specimens: Correlation of routine urine cytology, fluorescence in situ hybridization, and digital image analysis. Am J Clin Pathol 2005 124 : 854 61.
23. Bacus J, Grace L. Optical microscope system for standardized cell measurements and analyses. Appl Opt 1987 26 : 3280 93.
24. Moreno Luna LE, Kipp B, Halling KC, et al. Advanced cytologic techniques for the detection of malignant pancreatobiliary strictures. Gastroenterology 2006 131 : 1064 72.
25. Kipp BR, Campion MB, Coffman E, et al. An evaluation of ThinPrep UroCyte filters for the preparation of slides for fluorescence in situ hybridization. Diagn Cytopathol 2006 34 : 479 84.
26. Kipp BR, Stadheim LM, Halling SA, et al. A comparison of routine cytology and fluorescence in situ hybridization for the detection of malignant bile duct strictures [see comment]. Am J Gastroenterol 2004 99 : 1675 81.
27. Baron TH, Harewood GC, Rumalla A, et al. A prospective comparison of digital image analysis and routine cytology for the identification of malignancy in biliary tract strictures [see comment]. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2004 2 : 214 9.
28. Rumalla A, Baron TH, Leontovich O, et al. Improved diagnostic yield of endoscopic biliary brush cytology by digital image analysis. Mayo Clin Proc 2001 76 : 29 33.
29. Stewart CJR, Mills PR, Carter R, et al. Brush cytology in the assessment of pancreatico-biliary strictures: A review of 406 cases. J Clin Pathol 2001 54 : 449 55.
30. Jailwala J, Fogel EL, Sherman S, et al. Triple-tissue sampling at ERCP in malignant biliary obstruction. Gastrointest Endosc 2000 51 : 383 90.
31. Nichols JC, Gores GJ, LaRusso NF, et al. Diagnostic role of serum CA 19-9 for cholangiocarcinoma in patients with primary sclerosing cholangitis. Mayo Clin Proc 1993 68 : 874 9.
32. Patel AH, Harnois DM, Klee GG, et al. The utility of CA 19-9 in the diagnoses of cholangiocarcinoma in patients without primary sclerosing cholangitis. Am J Gastroenterol 2000 95 : 204 7.
33. Harewood GC, Baron TH, Stadheim LM, et al. Prospective, blinded assessment of factors influencing the accuracy of biliary cytology interpretation. Am J Gastroenterol 2004 99 : 1464 9.
34. Lee JG, Leung JW, Baillie J, et al. Benign, dysplastic, or malignant - making sense of endoscopic bile duct brush cytology: Results in 149 consecutive patients. Am J Gastroenterol 1995 90 : 722 6.