way for evaluation of gastrointestinal (GI) lesions due to its
capacity to differentiate between layers of the GI wall. EUS is
considered a powerful diagnostic instrument due to the
proliferation of image enhancement techniques and the ease of
tissue sampling. Aim: This study aims to evaluate role of EUS in
clarification of the nature of rectal and perirectal lesions.
Methodologies: EUS procedure was performed on 25 adult
patients in this study. Criteria for inclusion: patients aged 18
years or older who have been diagnosed with rectal and/or
perirectal lesions, including a thickened rectal wall, space
occupying mass in the rectum or peri-rectal area, rectal polyps,
and rectal submucosal lesions, as determined by imaging and/or
colonoscopy. Criteria for exclusion: individuals whose lesions
extend more than 20 centimeters from the anal verge, patients
who are unable receive propofol injections due to advanced
medical conditions, patients whose bleeding tendency. Patients
were subjected to (CBC, PT, PTT, INR), (abdominal ultrasound
or abdominopelvic CT or MRI), colonoscopy were performed
prior to the EUS procedure. Samples from FNB were sent to
pathologist.
Result: The lesions were: rectal, anal
adenocarcinoma & rectal adenoma, lipoma, GIST, inflammatory
reaction, postoperative sequalae & leiomyoma, EUS and EUS
FNB had sensitivity (100) %, specificity (100) %, area under
curve (01), accuracy (100) %, PPV (100) %, NPV (100) % for
diagnosis of malignant lesions. P-value for validity of EUS in
diagnosis ( |
