Yusuke Sekino

Dr. Yusuke Sekino

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

18Years (2009-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
16 November 2021 in Digestive Endoscopy
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MSMasato Suzuki
Masato Suzuki
YSYusuke Sekino
Yusuke Sekino
KHKunihiro Hosono
Kunihiro Hosono
KYKouji Yamamoto
Kouji Yamamoto
KKKenichi Kawana
Kenichi Kawana
ANAtsushi Nakajima
Atsushi Nakajima
Objectives For suspected common bile duct stone (CBDS) missed on computed tomography (CT), there is no clear evidence on whether endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) is the better diagnostic tool. We aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of EUS and MRCP for cases of missed CBDS on CT. Methods Patients suspected of having CBDS were enrolled and randomly allocated to the EUS or MRCP group. Upon the initial examination, those having CBDS or sludge formation underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), while those who were CBDS-negative underwent a second examination with either MRCP or EUS, which was distinct from the initial diagnostic procedure. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy, and the secondary outcomes were diagnostic ability, detection rate and characteristics of CBDS in the second examination, and the frequency of adverse events. Results Between April 2019 and January 2021, 50 patients were enrolled in the study. The accuracy was 92.3% for EUS and 68.4% for MRCP (P = 0.055). EUS showed 100% sensitivity, 88.2% specificity, 81.8% positive predictive value, and 100% negative predictive value, and MRCP showed 33.3% sensitivity, 84.6% specificity, 50% positive predictive value, and 73.3% negative predictive value. The CBDS detection rate in the second examination was 0% for MRCP after a negative EUS and 35.7% for EUS after a negative MRCP (P = 0.041). No adverse events occurred in any of the patients. Conclusions EUS may be a superior diagnostic tool compared to MRCP for the detection of CBDS that are undetected on CT. (UMIN000036357)

12 June 2013 in Pancreatology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
SKShingo Kato
Shingo Kato
KAKazunori Akimoto
Kazunori Akimoto
YNYoji Nagashima
Yoji Nagashima
HIHitoshi Ishiguro
Hitoshi Ishiguro
KKKensuke Kubota
Kensuke Kubota
Atsushi  NakajimaAtsushi Nakajima
Atsushi Nakajima

1 June 2011 in Clinical Journal of Gastroenterology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
HIHiroshi Iida
Hiroshi Iida
MIMasahiko Inamori
Masahiko Inamori
YSYusuke Sekino
Yusuke Sekino
YSYasunari Sakamoto
Yasunari Sakamoto
SYShigeru Yamato
Shigeru Yamato
Atsushi  NakajimaAtsushi Nakajima
Atsushi Nakajima

31 August 2021 in Journal of Medical Ultrasonics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MSMasato Suzuki
Masato Suzuki
YSYusuke Sekino
Yusuke Sekino
KHKunihiro Hosono
Kunihiro Hosono
KKKenichi Kawana
Kenichi Kawana
HNHajime Nagase
Hajime Nagase
ANAtsushi Nakajima
Atsushi Nakajima

3 December 2009
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
KSKumiko Saito
Kumiko Saito
MIMasahiko Inamori
Masahiko Inamori
YSYusuke Sekino
Yusuke Sekino
KAKeiko Akimoto
Keiko Akimoto
KSKaori Suzuki
Kaori Suzuki
ANAtsushi Nakajima
Atsushi Nakajima

3 March 2023 in Diagnostics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TTTakuya Takayanagi
Takuya Takayanagi
YSYusuke Sekino
Yusuke Sekino
NKNoriki Kasuga
Noriki Kasuga
KIKen Ishii
Ken Ishii
HNHajime Nagase
Hajime Nagase
Atsushi  NakajimaAtsushi Nakajima
Atsushi Nakajima
The presence of main pancreatic duct (MPD) dilatation is important for diagnosing pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDACs). However, we occasionally encounter PDAC cases without MPD dilatation. The objectives of this study were to compare the clinical findings and prognosis of pathologically diagnosed PDAC cases with and without MPD dilatation and to extract factors related to the prognosis of PDAC. The 281 patients pathologically diagnosed with PDAC were divided into two groups: the dilatation group (n = 215), consisting of patients with MPD dilatation of 3 mm or more, and the non-dilatation group (n = 66), consisting of patients with MPD dilatation less than 3 mm. We found that the non-dilatation group had more cancers in the pancreatic tail, more advanced disease stage, lower resectability, and worse prognoses than the dilatation group. Clinical stage and history of surgery or chemotherapy were identified as significant prognostic factors for PDAC, while tumor location was not. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI), and contrast-enhanced computed tomography had a high tumor detection rate for PDAC even in the non-dilatation group. Construction of a diagnostic system centered on EUS and DW-MRI is necessary for the early diagnosis of PDAC without MPD dilatation, which can improve its prognosis.