Matthew M Eves1*, Allison Harvey2, Michael Lysek3 and Roshanak Derakhshandeh3
1Infirmary Health, University of South Alabama, Alabama, USA
2Infirmary Health, Alabama, USA
3University of South Alabama College of Medicine, Alabama, USA
*Corresponding Author: Matthew M Eves, Infirmary Health, University of South Alabama, Alabama, USA.
Received: June 30, 2020; Published: June 28, 2020
Background and Aims: Previous studies confirm endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) can complete liver biopsy, paracentesis and EGD during one procedure. This study evaluates translating these studies to a community hospital.
Methods: 17 patients requiring EUS liver biopsy were compared to 17 transcutaneous patients for quality, cost and safety. This included evaluation for varices and diagnostic paracentesis.
Results: Mean number of portal triads was 12.7 EUS vs. 12.4 percutaneous (p value 0.89). Mean length of the longest core 0.94 EUS vs. 1.06 cm percutaneous (p value 0.14). Etiology of hepatitis 4/7 EUS vs. 0/4 percutaneous (p value 0.03). Confirmation of cirrhosis 4/6 EUS vs. 1/3 percutaneous. Total cost $1705 EUS vs. $3984 percutaneous. No significant complications occurred.
Conclusion: No significant biopsy sample differences existed. EUS provided better diagnostic information and clearly has economic advantages. The benefits of EUS guided liver workup translate to a community hospital.
Keywords: EUS; Liver; Biopsy; Aspiration; Varices; Banding; Ascites; Fine Needle; Portal; Hepatic; Cirrhosis; Percutaneous; Bleeding; Banding; Adequacy; Portal Triads; Fibrosis
Citation: Matthew M Eves., et al. “EUS Guided Liver Workup Versus Percutaneous Guided in a Community Hospital”.Acta Scientific Gastrointestinal Disorders 3.8 (2020): 28-34.
Copyright: © 2020 Matthew M Eves., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.