Assessment of morbidity and mortality associated with EUS-guided FNA: a systematic review

Needle-Tract Seeding of Pancreatic Cancer after EUS-FNA: A Systematic Review of Case Reports and Discussion of Management

Needle-tract seeding (NTS) has been sporadically reported as complication of Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-guided aspiration (FNA) in pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, the evidence of its treatment and outcome is sparse. Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic review of EUS-FNA NTS cases of PDAC and analyzed their management and outcome. Up to September 2022, the search query retrieved forty-five cases plus an unpublished case from our center, for a total of forty-six; 43.6% were male, with a mean age of 68.6 years. Thirty-four patients (87.1%) underwent an initial surgical resection, with only 44.1% and 5.9% undergoing adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy, respectively, and 5.9% undergoing both. The NTS nodule was mostly located in the posterior gastric wall, developing at a median of 19 months after primary resection; 82.4% underwent surgical resection of the seeding, while for 17.6%, palliative chemotherapy treatment. Follow-up after NTS diagnosis and treatment was reported for only twenty-three patients: when NTS was treated with surgery, the median overall survival was 26.5 months compared to 15.5 if treated with radio/chemotherapy. NTS after EUS-FNA of PDAC occurs late and might be treated aggressively with good results. Interestingly, only a low number of patients developing NTS underwent chemotherapy for the primary cancer, suggesting its possible protective role.

Does same session EUS-guided tissue acquisition and ERCP increase the risk of pancreatitis in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction?

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasonography-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) are increasingly performed in the same session in patients with malignant biliary obstruction. In this retrospective analysis, we investigated adverse events (AE) after same session ERCP and EUS-TA.

METHODS

Patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction who underwent EUS-TA and/or ERCP with self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement from January 2015 to April 2020 were included. Primary outcome was post-procedural pancreatitis (PPP). Secondary outcomes were other procedure-related AE.

RESULTS

We included 494 patients, of which 118 patients (24%) underwent same session EUS-TA+ERCP, 51 patients (10%) underwent separate session EUS-TA & ERCP, 90 patients (18%) ERCP-only and 235 patients (48%) EUS-TA only. PPP occurred in 22 patients (19%) after same session EUS-TA+ERCP and in 6 patients (12%) after separate EUS-TA & ERCP (p = 0.270). When adjusted for other known risk factors (i.e., difficult procedure), the difference in PPP remained non-significant (adjusted odds ratio 1.74 (95%-CI 0.65-4.67, p = 0.268). The incidence of other AE was similar, although the overall AE rate was significantly higher after same session EUS-TA+ERCP (36% vs. 20%, p = 0.030).

CONCLUSION

Same session EUS-TA+ERCP did not significantly increase the incidence of PPP, although overall AE were significantly higher. These data warrant further prospective studies.

Increased accuracy of FNA-based cytological diagnosis of pancreatic lesions by use of an ethanol-based fixative system: A STROBE compliant study

EUS-guided fine needle aspiration cytology (FNA) is the gold standard of evaluation of solid pancreatic lesions. However, accuracy is generally low. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic yield of conventional cytology (CC) with liquid-based cytological analysis using an ethanol based fixative system (LBC) without onsite cytopathological assessment. We performed a retrospective evaluation in patients referred to the Department of Interdisciplinary Endoscopy at Jena University Hospital for FNA of pancreatic masses between 2008 and 2015. LBC preservation of specimen was introduced in April 2011. Gold standard was defined as a surgically obtained histology or a patient follow-up of at least 1 year for diagnosis or exclusion of malignancy. 172 patients were included into the final analysis. Mean age was 64.8 years (SD 12.4 years), 105 patients were male. 107 lesions were malignant, while 65 lesions were benign. 89 specimens were evaluated by CC, whereas 83 specimens were processed by LBC. Liquid-based cytology performed significantly better than conventional cytology in terms of sensitivity (87.8% vs 67.2% (P = .021)), specificity (100% vs 87.1% (P = .047)) negative predictive value (NPV) (85% vs 58.7% (P = .009)) and accuracy (92.8% vs 74.2% (P = .001)). We observed no learning curve after implementation of LBC Liquid based cytology is a simple and inexpensive technique that helps improving sensitivity, specificity, NPV and accuracy over conventional cytology in fine needle aspirates from patients with pancreatic lesions. Therefore, this real-world evidence shows, that EUS-FNA specimen processing should be performed using LBC to achieve best possible results.

Cost-Effectiveness of a Risk-Tailored Pancreatic Cancer Early Detection Strategy Among Patients With New-Onset Diabetes

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Screening for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in asymptomatic adults is not recommended, however, patients with new-onset diabetes (NoD) have an 8 times higher risk of PDAC than expected. A novel risk-tailored early detection strategy targeting high-risk NoD patients might improve PDAC prognosis. We sought to evaluate the cost effectiveness of this strategy.

METHODS

We compared PDAC early detection strategies targeting NoD individuals age 50 years and older at various minimal predicted PDAC risk thresholds vs standard of care in a Markov state-transition decision model under the health care sector perspective using a lifetime horizon.

RESULTS

At a willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of $150,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, the early detection strategy targeting patients with a minimum predicted 3-year PDAC risk of 1% was cost effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $116,911). At a WTP threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, the early detection strategy at the 2% risk threshold was cost effective (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, $63,045). The proportion of PDACs detected at local stage, costs of treatment for metastatic PDAC, utilities of local and regional cancers, and sensitivity of screening were the most influential parameters. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed that at a WTP threshold of $150,000, early detection at the 1.0% risk threshold was favored (30.6%), followed by the 0.5% risk threshold (20.4%) vs standard of care (1.7%). At a WTP threshold of $100,000, early detection at the 1.0% risk threshold was favored (27.3%) followed by the 2.0% risk threshold (22.8%) vs standard of care (2.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

A risk-tailored PDAC early detection strategy targeting NoD patients with a minimum predicted 3-year PDAC risk of 1.0% to 2.0% may be cost effective.

A duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumor mimicking a pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor: a case report

Background

Duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors are rare. If tumor growth is extraluminal and involves the head of the pancreas, the diagnosis of a duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumor is difficult.

Case presentation

A 44-year-old Japanese woman was referred to our hospital with anemia. An enhanced computed tomography scan showed a hypervascular mass 30 mm in diameter, but the origin of the tumor, either the duodenum or the head of the pancreas, was unclear. Upper gastrointestinal endoscopy revealed bulging accompanied by erosion and redness in part of the duodenal bulb. Mucosal biopsy was not diagnostic. Endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration was difficult to perform because a pulsating blood vessel was present in the region to be punctured. These findings led to a diagnosis of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor invasion to the duodenum. The patient underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy. Histologically, the tumor was made up of spindle-shaped cells immunohistochemically positive for c-Kit and CD34. The tumor was ultimately diagnosed as a duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumor.

Conclusion

Extraluminal duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumors are rare and mimic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration is useful for preoperative diagnosis, but it is not possible in some cases. Intraoperative diagnosis based on a completely resected specimen of the tumor may be useful for modifying the surgical technique.

EUS-guided fine needle aspiration provides an open view for duodenal obstruction caused by urothelial carcinoma: a case report

Background

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is a good alternative and diagnostic tool for gastrointestinal wall thickening with prior negative endoscopic biopsies.

Case presentation

Here we reported a case of a 60-years-old woman admitted with atrophic right kidney and hydronephrosis and intermittent postprandial bloating. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy and small bowel endoscopy revealed wall thickening and stenosis at the junction of the descending and inferior duodenum. Biopsies from endoscopy showed no specific findings. EUS-FNA of the thickened duodenal wall was performed and histopathological examinations revealed poorly differentiated carcinoma. Immunohistochemically staining was positive for pan-cytokeratin, CK7, CK20, and weakly positive for GATA-3 and P63. These results were highly suggestive of metastatic urothelial cancer.

Conclusions

EUS-FNA played an important role in the diagnosis of unexplained gastrointestinal wall thickening and rare metastases to the gastrointestinal wall.

Advances in Pediatric Diagnostic Endoscopy: A State-of-the-Art Review

Pediatric endoscopy has revolutionized the way we diagnose and treat gastrointestinal disorders in children. Technological advances in computer processing and imaging continue to affect endoscopic equipment and advance diagnostic tools for pediatric endoscopy. Although commonly used by adult gastroenterologists, modalities, such as endomicroscopy, image-enhanced endoscopy, and impedance planimetry, are not routinely used in pediatric gastroenterology. This state-of-the-art review describes advances in diagnostic modalities, including image-enhanced endoscopy, confocal laser endomicroscopy, optical coherence tomography, endo functional luminal imaging probes, wireless motility/pH capsule, wireless colon capsule endoscopy, endoscopic ultrasound, and discusses the basic principles of each technology, including adult indications and pediatric applications, safety cost, and training data.

Technical Performance, Overall Accuracy and Complications of EUS-Guided Interventional Procedures: A Dynamic Landscape

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) gained wide acceptance as the diagnostic and minimally invasive therapeutic approach for intra-luminal and extraluminal gastrointestinal, as well as various non-gastrointestinal lesions. Since its introduction, EUS has undergone substantial technological advances. This multi-centric study is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent EUS for the evaluation of lesions located within the gastrointestinal tract and the proximal organs. It aimed to extensively assess in dynamic the dual-center EUS experience over the course of the past 20 years. Hence, we performed a population study and an overall assessment of the EUS procedures. The performance of EUS-FNA/FNB in diagnosing pancreatic neoplasms was evaluated. We also investigated the contribution of associating contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging (CE-EUS) with EUS-FNA/FNB for differentiating solid pancreatic lesions or cystic pancreatic lesions. A total of 2935 patients undergoing EUS between 2002–2021 were included, out of which 1880 were diagnostic EUS and 1052 EUS-FNA/FNB (80% FNA and 20% FNB). Therapeutic procedures performed included endoscopic transmural drainage of pancreatic fluid collections, celiac plexus block and neurolysis, while diagnostic EUS-like CE-EUS (20%) and real-time elastography (12%) were also conducted. Most complications occurred during the first 7 days after EUS-FNA/FNB or pseudocyst drainage. EUS and the additional tools have high technical success rates and low rates of complications. The EUS methods are safe, cost effective and indispensable for the diagnostic or therapeutic management in gastroenterological everyday practice.

[Alternatives of histological material collection - When and how is histological confirmation by ultrasound (US), computer tomography (CT) or endosonography (EUS) useful?]

Histological classifications of tumorous lesions together with adequate staging are necessary for stage-appropriate and personalized therapies. The indications, technical possibilities, and limitations as well as potential complications of image-guided needle biopsy by ultrasound, computed tomography, and endosonography are described. Which procedure for which organ and which lesion?

A case of solid-type pancreatic hamartoma presenting high apparent diffusion coefficient value: histopathological correlation and literature review

Pancreatic hamartoma is a rare tumor-like malformation and could mimic other pancreatic tumors including malignant neoplasm. Due to its rarity, magnetic resonance (MR) imaging findings including those diffusion-weighted (DW) imaging have not been clarified. We present a curious case of pancreatic hamartoma presenting high apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value with histopathological correlation. A 49-year-old woman with a pancreatic mass found incidentally on ultrasonography for medical checkup was referred to our institution for further examination and treatment because it slightly enlarged in the follow-up examination. Contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) and gadoxetic acid disodium-enhanced MR imaging revealed a well-demarcated solid mass of 13 mm in diameter in the pancreas body, which was gradually and homogeneously enhanced in the delayed/transient phase. It showed hyper intensity on T2-weight and DW images, and the mean ADC value was high (1.86 × 10^-3mm²/s). Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy was conducted with suspicious preoperative diagnosis of pancreatic hypovascular neuroendocrine neoplasm (NEN). Histologically, the mass consisted of many disarranged small ducts without atypia embedded in abundant fibrous stroma and contained scant fatty tissue in the periphery, which was not identified on CT and MR images. There were no islets and peripheral nerves throughout the mass. Finally, it was pathologically diagnosed as a solid-type pancreatic hamartoma. Based on radiological-pathological correlation, it was considered that the abundant fibrous stroma and both the widely distributed myxomatous periductal stroma and scattered edematous stroma corresponded with delayed homogenous enhancement on CT/MR images and high ADC value, respectively. Although it is difficult to distinguish solid-type pancreatic hamartoma from other solid pancreatic neoplasms including hypovascular NEN on the basis of usual radiological findings, the high ADC value reflecting the specific pathology may be helpful for the differential diagnosis.

Needle tract seeding after endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic tumors: A nationwide survey in Japan

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) plays a crucial role in the diagnosis of pancreatic tumors. The present study aimed to investigate the current status of needle tract seeding (NTS) after EUS-TA of pancreatic tumors based on a nationwide survey in Japan.

METHODS

Patients who underwent surgical resection of primary pancreatic tumors after EUS-TA performed between April 2010 and March 2018 were surveyed. The incidence rates of NTS were determined, and compared in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDACs) and other tumors, and in patients who underwent transgastric and transduodenal EUS-TA of PDACs. The detailed features and prognosis of patients with NTS were also assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 12,109 patients underwent surgical resection of primary pancreatic tumors after EUS-TA. The overall incidence rate of NTS was 0.330%, and the NTS rate was significantly higher in patients with PDAC than in those with other tumors (0.409% vs. 0.071%, P=0.004). NTS was observed in 0.857% of patients who underwent transgastric EUS-TA, but in none of those who underwent transduodenal EUS-TA. Of the patients with NTS of PDACs, the median time from EUS-TA to occurrence of NTS and median patient survival were 19.3 and 44.7 months, respectively, with 97.4% of NTS located in the gastric wall and 65.8% of NTS resected. The patient survival was significantly longer in patients who underwent NTS resection than in those without NTS resection (P=0.037).

CONCLUSIONS

NTS appeared only after transgastric not after transduodenal EUS-TA. Careful follow-up provides an opportunity to remove localized NTS lesions by gastrectomy.

State-of-the-Art Update of Pancreatic Cysts

Andrew Canakis.

Cystic Neoplasms of the Pancreas: Differential Diagnosis and Radiology Correlation

Although the probability of pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs) being detected is raising year by year, their differential diagnosis and individualized treatment are still a challenge in clinical work. PCNs are tumors containing cystic components with different biological behaviors, and their clinical manifestations, epidemiology, imaging features, and malignant risks are different. Some are benign [e.g., serous cystic neoplasms (SCNs)], with a barely possible that turning into malignant, while others display a low or higher malignant risk [e.g., solid pseudopapillary neoplasms (SPNs), intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs), and mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCNs)]. PCN management should concentrate on preventing the progression of malignant tumors while preventing complications caused by unnecessary surgical intervention. Clinically, various advanced imaging equipment are usually combined to obtain a more reliable preoperative diagnosis. The challenge for clinicians and radiologists is how to accurately diagnose PCNs before surgery so that corresponding surgical methods and follow-up strategies can be developed or not, as appropriate. The objective of this review is to sum up the clinical features, imaging findings and management of the most common PCNs according to the classic literature and latest guidelines.

Multicenter prospective study of the efficacy of stereomicroscopic on-site evaluation in endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition in patients with pancreatic cancer

OBJECTIVE

In sample isolation processing by stereomicroscopy (SIPS), a technique used to assess the quality of specimens collected during endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA), the cutoff value of stereomicroscopically visible white core (SVWC) (≥11 mm) indicates high diagnostic sensitivity. However, the procedure of SIPS is complicated and time-consuming. Therefore, we devised the stereomicroscopic on-site evaluation (SOSE), a new rapid assessment method that is simpler than SIPS and only determines if the SVWC cutoff value is attained. We aimed to examine the usefulness of SOSE in a multicenter, prospective setting.

METHODS

Seventy patients from multiple institutions with solid pancreatic masses suspected to be pancreatic cancer were included. EUS-TA was performed using a 22-gauge Franseen needle. SVWCs were measured on-site using stereomicroscopy. The primary outcome was the sensitivity of SVWC cutoff value in EUS-TA with SOSE.

RESULTS

The total number of punctures was 214 and SOSE was performed on 150 punctures. The SVWC cutoff value collection rate was 100% per lesion, with 80% in the first pass, 79% in the second pass, and 78% per puncture in all passes. The median time taken to determine the SVWC cutoff value for SOSE was 47 s. The sensitivity of the SVWC cutoff value was 93.2% for histology and 96.6% for cytology + histology. The per-lesion accuracy of pathological diagnosis reached the highest level (98.6%) at the second puncture.

CONCLUSIONS

SOSE showed high diagnostic sensitivity and may be a new rapid assessment method for the diagnosis of malignant pancreatic cancer using EUS-TA.

Value of 18F-FDG PET/MRI in the Preoperative Assessment of Resectable Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Comparison With 18F-FDG PET/CT, MRI, and Contrast-Enhanced CT

Objectives

To investigate the value of ¹⁸F-FDG PET/MRI in the preoperative assessment of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) and compare it with ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT, MRI, and CECT.

Methods

Thirty-five patients with resectable ESCC were prospectively enrolled and underwent PET/MRI, PET/CT, and CECT before surgery. The primary tumor and regional lymph nodes were assessed by PET/MRI, PET/CT, MRI, and CECT, respectively, and the diagnostic efficiencies were determined with postoperative pathology as a reference standard. The predictive role of imaging and clinical parameters on pathological staging was analyzed.

Results

For primary tumor staging, the accuracy of PET/MRI, MRI, and CECT was 85.7%, 77.1%, and 51.4%, respectively. For lymph node assessment, the accuracy of PET/MRI, PET/CT, MRI, and CECT was 96.2%, 92.0%, 86.8%, and 86.3%, respectively, and the AUCs were 0.883, 0.745, 0.697, and 0.580, respectively. PET/MRI diagnosed 13, 7, and 6 more stations of lymph node metastases than CECT, MRI, and PET/CT, respectively. There was a significant difference in SUV_max, TLG, and tumor wall thickness between T1-2 and T3 tumors (p = 0.004, 0.024, and < 0.001, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that thicker tumor wall thickness was a predictor of a higher T stage (p = 0.040, OR = 1.6).

Conclusions

¹⁸F-FDG PET/MRI has advantages over ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT, MRI, and CECT in the preoperative assessment of primary tumors and regional lymph nodes of ESCC. ¹⁸F-FDG PET/MRI may be a potential supplement or alternative imaging method for preoperative staging of ESCC.

Usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound in children with pancreatobiliary and gastrointestinal symptoms

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is useful in diagnosing and treating childhood pancreatobiliary and gastrointestinal diseases. However, there are limited data on its effectiveness for various indications. Patients and methods  This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of patients who underwent EUS for upper gastrointestinal tract disorders from January 2018 to December 2020 to assess its indications, findings, interventions, and complications. Results  Ninety-two procedures were performed in 85 children, (70.5 % male; mean [SD] age 12.1 years [3.9] years) with a mean (SD) symptom duration of 1.1 (0.5) years. The procedures were technically successful in all patients. The primary indication for EUS was abdominal pain in 45(52.9%) and jaundice/cholangitis in 15 patients (17.6 %). General anesthesia was used in 12 (13 %) and TIVA in 80 patients (87 %). The most common diagnostic findings were choledocholithiasis in 21 (24.7 %) and cholelithiasis in 12 patients (14.1 %). Among interventions, EUS-guided cystogastrostomy for pancreatic pseudocyst was done in four patients (4.7 %), and EUS-guided rendezvous for failed ERCP in one patient (1.2 %) with cholangitis. There were no immediate post-procedural complications. Overall, EUS had a meaningful impact on the subsequent clinical management in 69 cases (81.2 %). Conclusions  EUS in the pediatric population is safe, effective, and has a meaningful impact in appropriately selected cases. It can act as a rescue in major therapeutic procedures, but adequate care should be taken at the procedural level and during anesthesia.

Exploring the Clinical Utility of Pancreatic Cancer Circulating Tumor Cells

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the most frequent pancreatic cancer type, characterized by a dismal prognosis due to late diagnosis, frequent metastases, and limited therapeutic response to standard chemotherapy. Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are a rare subset of tumor cells found in the blood of cancer patients. CTCs has the potential utility for screening, early and definitive diagnosis, prognostic and predictive assessment, and offers the potential for personalized management. However, a gold-standard CTC detection and enrichment method remains elusive, hindering comprehensive comparisons between studies. In this review, we summarize data regarding the utility of CTCs at different stages of PDAC from early to metastatic disease and discuss the molecular profiling and culture of CTCs. The characterization of CTCs brings us closer to defining the specific CTC subpopulation responsible for metastasis with the potential to uncover new therapies and more effective management options for PDAC.

Clinical dilemma of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for resectable pancreatic body and tail cancer

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is a first-line procedure for definitive tissue diagnosis of pancreatic cancer because of its high accuracy and low complication rate. The overall sensitivity of EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer is approximately 90%; however, its diagnostic ability for small lesions (<10 mm) remains limited. Although EUS-FNA is a relatively safe procedure, with an overall morbidity of ≤2%, it should be noted that needle tract seeding (NTS) can occur after EUS-FNA, which may affect the patient prognosis negatively. In patients with resected pancreatic tumors, preoperative EUS-FNA is not associated with an increased risk of postoperative recurrence. However, NTS after EUS-FNA for resectable pancreatic body and tail cancer has been highlighted recently, particularly by Japanese endoscopists. Thus, the use of preoperative EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of resectable pancreatic body and tail cancer has become a clinical dilemma that challenges gastroenterologists and must be carefully considered on a case-by-case basis by weighing the benefits and risks. This review summarizes the pros and cons of performing EUS-FNA in patients with resectable pancreatic body and tail cancer and provides valuable insight for gastroenterologists treating pancreatic cancer.

Sensitivity of CT, MRI, and EUS-FNA/B in the preoperative workup of histologically proven left-sided pancreatic lesions

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Left-sided pancreatic lesions are often treated surgically. Accurate diagnostic work-up is therefore essential to prevent futile major abdominal surgery. Large series focusing specifically on the preoperative work-up of left-sided pancreatic lesions are lacking. This surgical cohort analysis describes the sensitivity of CT, MRI, and EUS-FNA/B in the diagnostic work-up of left-sided pancreatic lesions.

METHODS

We performed a post-hoc analysis of patients who underwent surgery for a left-sided pancreatic lesion between April 2010 and August 2017 and participated in the randomized CPR trial. Primary outcome was the sensitivity of CT, MRI, and EUS-FNA/B. Sensitivity was determined as the most likely diagnosis of each modality compared with the postoperative histopathological diagnosis. Additionally, the change in sensitivity of EUS versus EUS-FNA/B (i.e., cyst fluid analysis, and/or tissue acquisition) was measured.

RESULTS

Overall, 181 patients were included (benign: 23%, premalignant: 27%, malignant: 50%). Most patients had solid lesions (65%). Preoperative imaging included CT (86%), MRI (41%), EUS (68%). Overall, CT and EUS-FNA/B reached a sensitivity of both 71%, compared with 66% for MRI. When EUS was combined with FNA/B, sensitivity rose from 64% to 71%. For solid lesions, CT reached the highest sensitivity (75%) when compared with MRI (70%) and EUS-FNA/B (69%). For cystic lesions, EUS-FNA/B reached the highest sensitivity (75%) when compared with CT and MRI (both 62%).

CONCLUSIONS

CT is the most sensitive diagnostic modality for solid and EUS-FNA/B for cystic left-sided pancreatic lesions. EUS-FNA/B was associated with an increased sensitivity when compared to EUS alone.

Evolving pancreatic cancer treatment: From diagnosis to healthcare management

The prognosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is still the worst among solid tumors. In this review, a panel of experts addressed the main unanswered questions about the clinical management of this disease, with the aim of providing practical decision support for physicians. On the basis of the evidence available from the literature, the main topics concerning pancreatic cancer are discussed: the diagnosis, as the need for a pathological characterization and the role for germ-line and somatic molecular profiling; the therapeutic management of resectable disease, as the role of upfront surgery or neoadjuvant chemotherapy, the post-operative restaging and the optimal timing foradjuvant chemotherapy, the management of the borderline resectable and locally advanced disease; the metastatic disease and the role of surgery for the management of patients with isolated metastasis and the use of biomarkers of metastatic potential; the role of supportive care and the healthcare management of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Application of artificial intelligence for diagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma by EUS: A systematic review and meta-analysis

EUS-guided tissue acquisition carries certain risks from unnecessary needle puncture in the low-likelihood lesions. Artificial intelligence (AI) system may enable us to resolve these limitations. We aimed to assess the performance of AI-assisted diagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) by off-line evaluating the EUS images from different modes. The databases PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, ISI, IEEE, and Association for Computing Machinery were systematically searched for relevant studies. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and summary receiver operating characteristic curve were estimated using R software. Of 369 publications, 8 studies with a total of 870 PDAC patients were included. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of AI-assisted EUS were 0.91 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87-0.93) and 0.90 (95% CI, 0.79-0.96), respectively, with DOR of 81.6 (95% CI, 32.2-207.3), for diagnosis of PDAC. The area under the curve was 0.923. AI-assisted B-mode EUS had pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of 0.91, 0.90, 0.94, and 0.84, respectively; while AI-assisted contrast-enhanced EUS and AI-assisted EUS elastography had sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of 0.95, 0.95, 0.97, and 0.90; and 0.88, 0.83, 0.96 and 0.57, respectively. AI-assisted EUS has a high accuracy rate and may potentially enhance the performance of EUS by aiding the endosonographers to distinguish PDAC from other solid lesions. Validation of these findings in other independent cohorts and improvement of AI function as a real-time diagnosis to guide for tissue acquisition are warranted.

Pancreaticobiliary endoscopic ultrasound in England 2007 to 2016: Changing practice and outcomes

Background and study aims  Population-level data on the outcomes of pancreaticobiliary endoscopic ultrasound (PB-EUS) are limited. We examined national PB-EUS and fine-needle aspiration (FNA) activity, its relation to pancreatic cancer therapy, associated mortality and adverse events. Patients and methods  Adults undergoing PB-EUS in England from 2007-2016 were identified in Hospital Episode Statistics. A pancreatic cancer cohort diagnosed within 6 months of PB-EUS were studied separately. Multivariable logistic regression models examined associations with 30-day mortality and therapies for pancreatic cancer. Results  79,269 PB-EUS in 68,908 subjects were identified. Annual numbers increased from 2,874 (28 % FNA) to 12,752 (35 % FNA) from 2007 to 2016. 8,840 subjects (13 %) were diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. Sedation related adverse events were coded in 0.5 % and emergency admission with acute pancreatitis in 0.2 % within 48 hours of PB-EUS. 1.5 % of subjects died within 30 days of PB-EUS. Factors associated with 30-day mortality included increasing age (odds ratio 1.03 [95 % CI 1.03-1.04]); male sex (1.38 [1.24-1.56]); increasing comorbidity (1.49 [1.27-1.74]); EUS-FNA (2.26 [1.98-2.57]); pancreatic cancer (1.39 [1.19-1.62]); increasing deprivation (least deprived quintile 0.76 [0.62-0.93]) and lower provider PB-EUS volume (2.83 [2.15-3.73]). Factors associated with surgical resection in the pancreatic cancer cohort included lower provider PB-EUS volume (0.44 [0.26-0.74]) and the least deprived subjects (1.33 [1.12-1.57]). 33 % of pancreatic cancer subjects who underwent EUS, did not subsequently receive active cancer treatment. Conclusions  Lower provider PB-EUS volume was associated with higher 30-day mortality and reduced rates of both pancreatic cancer surgery and chemotherapy. These results suggest potential issues with case selection in lower-volume EUS providers.

Adverse events of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for histologic diagnosis in Japanese tertiary centers: Multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is used for the histopathological diagnosis of any type of gastrointestinal disease. Few adverse events are experienced with this procedure; however, the actual rate of adverse events remains unclear. This study aimed to clarify the current status of cases that experienced adverse events related to the EUS-FNA procedure used for histopathologic diagnoses.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of cases with EUS-FNA-related adverse events in Japanese tertiary centers was conducted by assessing the following clinical data: basic case information, FNA technique, type of procedural adverse events, and prognosis.

RESULTS

Of the 13,566 EUS-FNA cases overall, the total number of cases in which adverse events related to EUS-FNA occurred was 234. The incidence of EUS-FNA-related adverse events was ~1.7%. Bleeding and pancreatitis cases accounted for ~49.1% and 26.5% of all adverse events, respectively. Bleeding was the most common adverse event with only seven cases requiring blood transfusion. In cases with neuroendocrine tumors, pancreatitis was the most frequent adverse event. Needle tract seeding because of EUS-FNA was observed during the follow-up period in only ~0.1% of cases with pancreatic cancer. There was no mortality because of adverse events caused by EUS-FNA.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed that the adverse events-related EUS-FNA for histopathologic diagnoses were not severe conditions, and had low incidence.

A prospective multicenter study of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy using a 22-gauge Franseen needle for pancreatic solid lesions

BACKGROUND AND AIM

While encouraging data of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) using a 22-gauge Franseen needle have been reported, large-scale data of per pass and quantitative analyses are still lacking.

METHODS

This was a multicenter prospective study of EUS-FNB using the 22-gauge Franseen needle for a pancreatic solid lesion. Cytological and histological analyses per pass were evaluated and semi-quantitative analyses were performed on core tissue and blood contamination. Primary end-point was diagnostic accuracy per session. Prognostic factors were analyzed for diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, core tissue, and blood contamination.

RESULTS

A total of 629 passes were performed in 244 cases at 14 centers between 2018 and 2019. The median tumor size was 29 mm, and the puncture was transduodenal in 43%. The median pass number was 2. Diagnostic accuracy per session, at a first pass, and per pass were 93%, 90%, and 88%. In 198 cases with pancreatic cancer, diagnostic sensitivity per session, at a first pass, and per pass were 94%, 89%, and 89%. The rates of core tissue score of 4 and blood contamination score of 3 were 50% and 47%. The adverse event rate was 1.6%. In the multivariate analysis, tumor size ≤20 mm (odds ratio [OR] of 0.46, P = 0.03), transduodenal puncture (OR of 0.53, P = 0.04), and suction (OR of 0.16, P = 0.01) were associated with lower diagnostic accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

The EUS-FNB using the 22-gauge Franseen needle for pancreatic solid lesions showed high per pass and overall diagnostic accuracy.

Advanced Endoscopic Techniques for the Diagnosis of Pancreatic Cancer and Management of Biliary and GastricOutlet Obstruction

Following high-quality imaging studies for staging, endoscopic ultrasound examination fine needle aspiration/biopsy is the preferred modality for tissue diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with metal stent placement is used for palliation of malignant biliary obstruction. Metal stents can be placed in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer in whom surgery is going to be delayed. For palliation of gastric outlet obstruction, endoscopic enteral stenting is often selected because of its less invasiveness. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage for malignant biliary obstruction or gastrojejunostomy for gastric outlet obstruction are emerging less invasive techniques as compared with palliative surgery.

Pancreatic cancer in 2021: What you need to know to win

Pancreatic cancer is one of the solid tumors with the worst prognosis. Five-year survival rate is less than 10%. Surgical resection is the only potentially curative treatment, but the tumor is often diagnosed at an advanced stage of the disease and surgery could be performed in a very limited number of patients. Moreover, surgery is still associated with high post-operative morbidity, while other therapies still offer very disappointing results. This article reviews every aspect of pancreatic cancer, focusing on the elements that can improve prognosis. It was written with the aim of describing everything you need to know in 2021 in order to face this difficult challenge.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine-needle Biopsy With or Without Rapid On-site Evaluation for Diagnosis of Solid Pancreatic Lesions: A Randomized Controlled Non-Inferiority Trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The benefit of rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) on the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) has never been evaluated in a randomized study. This trial aimed to test the hypothesis that in solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs), diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB without ROSE was not inferior to that of EUS-FNB with ROSE.

METHODS

A noninferiority study (noninferiority margin, 5%) was conducted at 14 centers in 8 countries. Patients with SPLs requiring tissue sampling were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo EUS-FNB with or without ROSE using new-generation FNB needles. The touch-imprint cytology technique was used to perform ROSE. The primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy, and secondary endpoints were safety, tissue core procurement, specimen quality, and sampling procedural time.

RESULTS

Eight hundred patients were randomized over an 18-month period, and 771 were analyzed (385 with ROSE and 386 without). Comparable diagnostic accuracies were obtained in both arms (96.4% with ROSE and 97.4% without ROSE, P = .396). Noninferiority of EUS-FNB without ROSE was confirmed with an absolute risk difference of 1.0% (1-sided 90% confidence interval, -1.1% to 3.1%; noninferiority P < .001). Safety and sample quality of histologic specimens were similar in both groups. A significantly higher tissue core rate was obtained by EUS-FNB without ROSE (70.7% vs. 78.0%, P = .021), with a significantly shorter mean sampling procedural time (17.9 ± 8.8 vs 11.7 ± 6.0 minutes, P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-FNB demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy in evaluating SPLs independently on execution of ROSE. When new-generation FNB needles are used, ROSE should not be routinely recommended. (ClinicalTrial.gov number NCT03322592.).

Role of EUS in detection of liver metastasis not seen by computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging during staging of pancreatic, gastrointestinal, and thoracic malignancies

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Liver metastases might not be detected by computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) due to their small size, but they can be detected by EUS. Furthermore, EUS-FNA has a significant impact on improving the diagnostic accuracy of EUS. The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility of EUS in detection of occult small hepatic focal lesions at the time of primary tumor staging, not seen by CT or MRI.

METHODS

This prospective study included 730 patients who underwent EUS for staging or sampling of gastrointestinal, pancreatic, or thoracic malignancy. The liver was examined thoroughly for detection of occult lesions. CT or MRI was done within 1 week of EUS examination.

RESULTS

EUS examination of the liver detected focal lesions in 150 patients (20.5%) and metastases in 118 patients (16.2%); meanwhile, CT and MRI detected focal lesions in 99 patients (13.6%) and metastases in 82 patients (11.2%). EUS missed focal lesions in 7 patients, 6 of which were liver metastases (1.0% and 0.8%, respectively), while CT and MRI missed focal lesions in 58 patients, 42 of which were metastases (7.9% and 5.8%, respectively), which were detected by EUS.

CONCLUSION

Thorough dedicated EUS examination of the liver is a feasible useful tool for detection of small hepatic lesions missed by CT and MRI. It is not considered an extra financial burden to the patient or health-care system because those patients are indicated for EUS examination for evaluation of their original lesion in the first place. Furthermore, EUS-FNA can add another advantage in diagnosing the etiology of such lesions.

Role of fluorescence confocal microscopy for rapid evaluation of EUS fine-needle biopsy sampling in pancreatic solid lesions

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) sampling is the standard procedure for diagnosis of pancreatic lesions. Fluorescence confocal microscopy (FCM) allows imaging of tissues in the fresh state, requiring minimal preparation without damage or loss of tissue. Until now, no data exist on FCM in the field of microhistologic specimens. We aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of FCM in predicting histologic adequacy of EUS-FNB samples in pancreatic solid lesions and to assess the agreement between FCM evaluation and final histology.

METHODS

In this single-center prospective study on consecutive patients with pancreatic lesions receiving EUS-FNB, the obtained samples have been evaluated at FCM and classified as "inadequate" or "adequate" (benign, suspicious, or malignant). The kappa test was used to quantify agreement. The diagnostic accuracy of FCM was assessed. A P < .05 was considered to be statistically significant.

RESULTS

From April 2020 to September 2020, 81 patients were enrolled. In all cases FCM showed the macro image of the sample and created a digital image. Of the samples, 92.6% was defined as adequate at the FCM evaluation and confirmed at histopathology. Histologic diagnoses were 8% benign, 17.3% atypical/suspicious, and 74.7% malignant with satisfactory agreement with the FCM evaluation (Cohen's κ coefficient, .95; 95% confidence interval [CI], .89-1.01; P = .001). The sensitivity of the FCM evaluation was 100% (95% CI, 95%-100%), specificity 66.7% (95% CI, 22.3%-95.7%), accuracy 97% (95% CI, 90.7%-99.7%), positive predictive value 97% (95% CI, 91.8%-99%), and negative predictive value 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

FCM represents a new technique successfully applicable to microhistologic specimens. It provides fast information about sample adequacy in small specimens with good agreement in the final histology.

Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline update

This is a collaboration between the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), and is a scheduled update of their 2016 guideline on endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. The guideline development committee included representatives from the British Society of Haematology, the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society, and two patient representatives from the charities Anticoagulation UK and Thrombosis UK, as well as gastroenterologists. The process conformed to AGREE II principles, and the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were derived using GRADE methodology. Prior to submission for publication, consultation was made with all member societies of ESGE, including BSG. Evidence-based revisions have been made to the risk categories for endoscopic procedures, and to the categories for risks of thrombosis. In particular a more detailed risk analysis for atrial fibrillation has been employed, and the recommendations for direct oral anticoagulants have been strengthened in light of trial data published since the previous version. A section has been added on the management of patients presenting with acute GI haemorrhage. Important patient considerations are highlighted. Recommendations are based on the risk balance between thrombosis and haemorrhage in given situations.

Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guideline update

This is a collaboration between the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE), and is a scheduled update of their 2016 guideline on endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. The guideline development committee included representatives from the British Society of Haematology, the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society, and two patient representatives from the charities Anticoagulation UK and Thrombosis UK, as well as gastroenterologists. The process conformed to AGREE II principles and the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were derived using GRADE methodology. Prior to submission for publication, consultation was made with all member societies of ESGE, including BSG. Evidence-based revisions have been made to the risk categories for endoscopic procedures, and to the categories for risks of thrombosis. In particular a more detailed risk analysis for atrial fibrillation has been employed, and the recommendations for direct oral anticoagulants have been strengthened in light of trial data published since the previous version. A section has been added on the management of patients presenting with acute GI haemorrhage. Important patient considerations are highlighted. Recommendations are based on the risk balance between thrombosis and haemorrhage in given situations.

[Clinical and Technical Guideline for Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Tissue Acquisition of Pancreatic Solid Tumor: Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy]

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor requires a strict recommendation for its proper use in clinical practice because of its technical difficulty and invasiveness. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy appointed a Task Force to draft clinical practice guidelines for EUS-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor. The strength of recommendation and the level of evidence for each statement were graded according to the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014. The committee, comprising a development panel of 16 endosonographers and an expert on guideline development methodology, developed 12 evidence-based recommendations in eight categories intended to help physicians make evidence- based clinical judgments with regard to the diagnosis of pancreatic solid tumor. This clinical practice guideline discusses EUS-guided sampling in pancreatic solid tumor and makes recommendations on circumstances that warrant its use, technical issues related to maximizing the diagnostic yield (e.g., needle type, needle diameter, adequate number of needle passes, sample obtaining techniques, and methods of specimen processing), adverse events of EUS-guided tissue acquisition, and learning-related issues. This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This guideline may not be applicable for all clinical situations and should be interpreted in light of specific situations and the availability of resources. It will be revised as necessary to cover progress and changes in technology and evidence from clinical practice.

Pancreatic solid pseudopapillary neoplasm: a single-institution study

BACKGROUNDS

Solid pseudopapillary neoplasms (SPNs) are a distinct but rare form of low-grade pancreatic neoplasia, accounting for 0.3%-2.7% of all pancreatic tumours. They are most common in young females. Local recurrence and distant metastasis are reported but extremely rare, and are usually resectable with curative intent. We report the clinicopathological features and long-term outcomes of SPNs following surgical resection from a single institution.

METHODS

A total of 1296 patients undergoing pancreatic resection during the 30 years period from 1991 to 2020 were retrospectively reviewed, and those with a confirmed pathological diagnosis of pancreatic SPN on review were included.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients (1.7% of all patients undergoing resection), were identified. Twenty patients (91%) were female. Unlike previous studies, most patients (91%) were symptomatic at diagnosis. On diagnostic CT, cystic components were visible in 16 patients (73%), calcifications were found in two patients (9%), haemorrhage in one patient (5%) and a defined capsule was seen in four patients (18%). Surgical resection was undertaken on all cases, with distal pancreatectomy the most commonly performed (n = 11, 50%). One patient (4.7%) had nodal involvement, nine patients had an incomplete tumour capsule (41%) and seven patients (32%) had tumour extension into the pancreatic parenchyma. Despite this, no patients had disease recurrence at 10 years. One patient died within 5 years of heart failure unrelated to the SPN process; no patients died within 10 years of the disease.

CONCLUSION

We confirm a high proportion of female patients. Interestingly, a high proportion of our cohort was investigated for symptomatic disease. Despite a high proportion of tumours with an incomplete capsule, and extension into the pancreatic parenchyma, our findings indicated that SPN patients have excellent survival after margin-negative surgical resection.

Recent Advances in Endosonography-Elastography: Literature Review

Ultrasonographic elastography is a modality used to visualize the elastic properties of tissues. Technological advances in ultrasound equipment have supported the evaluation of elastography (EG) in endosonography (EUS). Currently, the usefulness of not only EUS-strain elastography (EUS-SE) but also EUS-shear wave elastography (EUS-SWE) has been reported. We reviewed the literature on the usefulness of EUS-EG for various diseases such as chronic pancreatitis, pancreatic solid lesion, autoimmune pancreatitis, lymph node, and gastrointestinal and subepithelial lesions. The importance of this new diagnostic parameter, "tissue elasticity" in clinical practice might be applied not only to the diagnosis of liver fibrosis but also to the elucidation of the pathogeneses of various gastrointestinal diseases, including pancreatic diseases, and to the evaluation of therapeutic effects. The most important feature of EUS-EG is that it is a non-invasive modality. This is an advantage not found in EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), which has made remarkable progress in the field of diagnostics in recent years. Further development of artificial intelligence (AI) is expected to improve the diagnostic performance of EUS-EG. Future research on EUS-EG is anticipated.

Risk of adverse events associated with upper and lower endoscopic ultrasound: a population-based cohort study

Background and study aim  Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) enables diagnostic evaluation and therapeutic interventions but is associated with adverse events. We conducted a population-based cohort study to determine the risk of adverse events for upper and lower EUS with and without fine-needle aspiration (FNA). Patients and methods  All adults who underwent EUS and resided in Calgary in 2007-2013 were included. Endoscopy and provincial databases were used to identify EUS procedures, unplanned emergency department visits, and hospital admissions within 30 days of the procedures, which were then characterized through formal chart review. Adverse events were defined a priori and classified as definitely, possibly, or not related to EUS. The primary outcome was 30-day risk of adverse events classified as definitely or possibly related to EUS. Univariable and multivariable analyses were conducted with risk factors known to be associated with EUS adverse events. Results  2895 patients underwent 3552 EUS procedures: 3034 (85 %) upper EUS, of which 710 (23 %) included FNA, and 518 (15 %) lower EUS, of which 23 (4 %) involved FNA. Overall, 69 procedures (2 %) involved an adverse event that was either definitely or possibly related to EUS, with 33 (1 %) requiring hospitalization. None of the adverse events required intensive care or resulted in death. On multivariable analysis, only FNA was associated with increased risk of adverse events (odds ratio 6.43, 95 % confidence interval 3.92-10.55; P  < 0.001). Conclusion  Upper and lower EUS were generally safe but FNA substantially increased the risk of adverse events. EUS-related complications requiring hospitalization were rare.

Diagnostic Value of EUS-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration Biopsy for Gastric Linitis Plastica with Negative Endoscopic Biopsy

Due to the tendency of gastric linitis plastica (GLP) to cause extensive submucosal infiltration, a superficial endoscopic biopsy sometimes yields no evidence of malignancy, hindering definite diagnosis. The present study was a single-center retrospective analysis of 54 consecutive patients diagnosed with GLP between 2016 and 2020 to evaluate EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) biopsy outcomes in patients with negative endoscopic biopsy findings. A pathological GLP diagnosis was achieved by endoscopic biopsy in 40 patients (74.1%). EUS-FNA biopsy with a 22-gauge needle was performed in 13 of the remaining 14 patients, and GLP diagnosis was confirmed in 10 patients, with a median of three needle passes. The remaining four patients were laparoscopically diagnosed with GLP. The diagnostic ability of EUS-FNA biopsy for GLP was 76.9%, and EUS-FNA biopsy contributed to GLP diagnosis in 18.5% (10/54) of all cases. None of the 13 patients exhibited EUS-FNA biopsy-related adverse events. Univariable and multivariable analyses revealed an absence of superficial ulcerations as a predictor of false-negative endoscopic biopsy findings in patients with GLP. These results suggest EUS-FNA biopsy as a minimally invasive and safe alternative diagnostic modality for GLP in cases where conventional endoscopic biopsy fails to verify malignancy, although prospective studies with larger cohorts are warranted to confirm these findings.

Targeted transcriptome and KRAS mutation analysis improve the diagnostic performance of EUS-FNA biopsies in pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) carries a poor prognosis, and current diagnostic tests have suboptimal sensitivity. Incorporating standard cytology with targeted transcriptomic and mutation analysis may improve the accuracy of diagnostic biopsies, thus reducing the burden of repeat procedures and delays to treatment initiation.

METHODS

We reviewed the accuracy of 308 EUS-FNA PDAC biopsies using a large multicenter clinical and biospecimen database, then performed RNA sequencing on 134 EUS-FNA biopsies spanning all stages of disease. We identified a transcriptomic diagnostic gene signature which was validated using external datasets and 60 further diagnostic EUS-FNAs. KRAS ddPCR analysis was performed and correlated with signature gene expression.

RESULTS

The sensitivity of EUS-FNA cytology in diagnosing solid pancreatic masses in our retrospective cohort (n=308) was 78.6% (95% CI 73.2 to 83.2%). KRAS mutation analysis and our custom transcriptomic signature significantly improved upon the diagnostic accuracy of standard cytology to 91.3% in external validation sets and 91.6% in our validation cohort (n=60). Exploratory ddPCR analysis of KRAS mutant allele fraction (MAF%) correlated with signature performance and may represent a novel surrogate marker of tumour cellularity in EUS-FNA biopsies.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support EUS-FNA biopsies as a feasible tissue source for integrated genomic and transcriptomic analysis of PDAC across all tumour stages, including cases with non-diagnostic cytology. Our transcriptome-derived genetic signature in combination with tissue KRAS mutation analysis significantly improves upon the diagnostic accuracy of current standard procedures, and has potential clinical utility in improving the speed and accuracy of diagnosis for patients presenting with PDAC.

High Diagnostic Accuracy and Safety of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration in Malignant Lymph Nodes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is increasingly being used for diagnosing lymphadenopathy. We aim to systematically review the accuracy of EUS-FNA in differentiating benign and malignant mediastinal and abdominal lymph nodes (LNs).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed on multiple electronic databases through February 2020. A random or fixed effect model generated the pooled sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio (LR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of EUS-FNA. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression were used to explore sources of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies involving 2753 patients with 2833 LNs were included. In the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant LNs, EUS-FNA had a pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive LR, and negative LR of 87% (95% confidence interval [CI] 86-90%), 100% (95% CI 99-100%), 68.98 (95% CI 42.10-113.02), and 0.14 (95% CI 0.11-0.17), respectively. The pooled rate of adverse events associated with EUS-FNA was 1.57% (95% CI 1.06-2.24%). The summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) yielded an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.9912. EUS-FNA performed in mediastinal LNs gained a sensitivity of 85% (95% CI 81-88%), while in abdominal LNs, it reached 87% (95% CI 82-91%). The sensitivity of the subgroup with rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) was 91% (95% CI 89-93%), while non-ROSE was 85% (95% CI 82-87%).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-FNA is a sensitive, highly specific, and safe method for distinguishing benign and malignant mediastinal or abdominal LNs. However, the sensitivity of EUS-FNA still varies significantly among different centers.

Comparison of contrast-enhanced versus conventional EUS-guided FNA/fine-needle biopsy in diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (CEH-EUS) is useful in the differential diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs). However, there is lack of verification about the usefulness of CEH-EUS-guided FNA/fine-needle biopsy (FNB) sampling. This study aimed to investigate the usefulness of CEH-EUS-guided FNA/FNB sampling without on-site cytopathology.

METHODS

Patients with SPLs were prospectively enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1) to 2 parallel groups, the interventional group (CEH-EUS) or the control group (conventional EUS). The diagnostic sensitivity and optimal number of needle passes for pathologic diagnosis were investigated and compared between groups.

RESULTS

Two hundred forty patients were enrolled from March 2016 to September 2019, with 120 patients assigned to each group. Pancreatic malignancies and neuroendocrine tumors were found in 202 (90.83%) and 9 (3.75%) patients, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of age, sex, lesion size (30.96 ± 12.09 mm in the CEH-EUS group vs 33.09 ± 16.39 mm in the conventional EUS group; P = .252), lesion location, adverse event rate, and disease distribution. The diagnostic sensitivity values in the CEH-EUS and conventional EUS groups were 85.8% and 88.3%, respectively (P = .564). All patients in the conventional EUS group and most in the CEH-EUS group received a pathologic diagnosis within 3 needle passes.

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic sensitivity for SPLs was not different between the CEH-EUS and conventional EUS groups, and no independent factors were found that could improve diagnostic sensitivity. CEH-EUS-guided FNA/FNB sampling does not need to be used routinely and may be selectively considered for small, indeterminate lesions. (Clinical trial registration number: KCT 0001840.).

[Preoperative diagnostics of pancreatic neoplasms]

While patients with clinico-radiologically diagnosed resectable pancreatic cancer usually undergo surgery without preoperative cytological or histopathological diagnostics, patients with inoperable tumors or ambiguous findings in imaging often undergo EUS-FNA or EUS-FNB (endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration or endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy). In many cases, this concerns pancreatic cystic lesions, which can range from benign inflammatory pseudocysts to invasive pancreatic cancer emerging from intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) or mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCNs). However, the evaluation of EUS-FNA material can be especially hampered by contamination with gastric or enteric cells or mucin, degenerative changes, or low or even no cellularity of the sample. Next-generation-sequencing-based molecular analyses, especially of cystic lesions, can significantly increase the accuracy of EUS-FNA diagnostics of the pancreas. Interpretation of morphological and molecular data considering each case's clinico-radiological context is crucial. While reliable molecular markers for the detection of mucinous and specific nonmucinous pancreatic neoplasms already exist, establishing valid markers for the detection of high-grade lesions is an urgent future goal.

Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration vs fine needle biopsy for pancreatic masses, subepithelial lesions, and lymph nodes

Endoscopic ultrasound tissue acquisition, in the form of both fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB), is utilized for pancreatic mass lesions, subepithelial lesions, and lymph node biopsy. Both procedures are safe and yield high diagnostic value. Despite its high diagnostic yield, EUS-FNA has potential limitations associated with cytological aspirations, including inability to determine histologic architecture, and a small quantitative sample for further immunohistochemical staining. EUS-FNB, with its larger core biopsy needle, was designed to overcome these potential limitations. However, it remains unclear which technique should be used and for which lesions. Comparative trials are plagued by heterogeneity at every stage of comparison; including variable needles used, and different definitions of endpoints, which therefore limit generalizability. Thus, we present a review of prospective trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses on studies examining EUS-FNA vs EUS-FNB. Prospective comparative trials of EUS-FNA vs EUS-FNB primarily focus on pancreatic mass lesions, and yield conflicting results in terms of demonstrating the superiority of one method. However, consistent among trials is the potential for diagnosis with fewer passes, and a larger quantity of sample achieved for next generation sequencing. With regard to subepithelial lesions and lymph node biopsy, fewer prospective trials exist, and larger prospective studies are necessary. Based on the available literature, we would recommend EUS-FNB for peri-hepatic lymph nodes.

Quality metrics in the performance of EUS: a population-based observational cohort of the United States

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There are few data on the quality of EUS in the community setting. We characterized EUS performance at the individual facility level in 3 large American states, using need for repeat biopsy (NRB) as a metric for procedural failure, and the rate of unplanned hospital encounters (UHEs) as a metric for adverse events.

METHODS

We collected data on 76,614 EUS procedures performed at 166 facilities in California, Florida, and New York (2009-2014). The endpoints for the study were 7-day rate of UHEs after EUS, and 30-day rate of NRB after EUS with fine-needle aspiration. Facility-level factors analyzed included annual procedure volume, urban/rural location, and free-standing status (facilities not attached to a larger hospital). Predictors for UHE and NRB were analyzed in both multivariable regression and nonparametric local regression.

RESULTS

Facility volume did not predict risk for UHEs. However, high facility volume protected against NRB (P trend <.001) even after adjustment for other facility-level factors. When regressing facility volume against risk for NRB in local regression, a join point (inflection point) was identified at 97 procedures per annum. Once facilities reached this threshold volume, there appeared little additional protective effect of higher volume. Rural facility location (odds ratio, 1.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.36-2.40) and free-standing status (odds ratio, 1.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.16-2.13) were also associated with NRB.

CONCLUSION

Facility volume does not predict risk for adverse events after EUS. However, high facility volume is associated with decreased rates of technical failure (as assessed by NRB). These data provide one of the first descriptions of EUS practice in community settings and highlight opportunities to improve endoscopic quality nationally.

Accuracy and other quality indicators of solid pancreatic mass endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration and biopsy in two academic endoscopy centers

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration/biopsy (EUS-FNA/FNB) is highly accurate, but discrepancies between cytological and surgical diagnoses are still observed. We aimed to determine its accuracy and monitor quality indicators in our facilities.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of all cases of pancreatic solid lesions evaluated by EUS-FNA/FNB, between July 2015 and June 2018, in two centers. Cytological and surgical findings were categorized into five groups: benign, malignant, suspect of malignancy, undetermined and insufficient for diagnosis. Final diagnosis was based on surgical diagnosis and, in patients who did not undergo surgery, on clinical outcome after 6 months follow-up.

RESULTS

Altogether, 142 patients were included. FNA was the preferred tissue acquisition method (88%), with a predilection for the FNA 22G needle (57%). Cytology was insufficient for diagnosis in 2 cases, therefore a full diagnostic sample was available in 98.6% of the patients (>90%, ESGE target). Fifty-five (38.7%) patients underwent surgery. In term of cancer diagnosis, comparison with final surgical pathology (n=55) revealed 89% true positives, 5.5% true negatives, 3.6% false positives and 1.8% false negatives. When combining surgical diagnosis and clinical outcomes together, EUS-guided sampling sensitivity was 97.4% (92.5-99.5), specificity was 92.3% (74.9-99.1), positive predictive value was 98.2% (93.6- 99.5), negative predictive value was 88.9% (72.3-96.1) and accuracy was 96.4% (91.9-98.8). Post-procedural acute pancreatitis was reported in 2 patients (1.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

These results reveal a performance for diagnostic tissue sampling well above the ESGE proposed target standard. Also, the uncommon high specificity illustrates the determining role of the pathologist's final interpretation and diagnosis.

The Impact of Recent Advances in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition on the Management of Pancreatic Cancer

Over the last few decades, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition has become the method of choice for the pathological diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions. Due to its high diagnostic yield and low complication rate, EUS-guided tissue acquisition has surpassed percutaneous sampling techniques. For many years, EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) was traditionally used to obtain cytological aspirates of solid pancreatic lesions, with sensitivity values ranging from 80 to 90% for the diagnosis of malignancy. Nevertheless, despite numerous technical advances, EUS-FNA still presents some limitations. Therefore, EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) has been introduced to provide tissue core biopsies, allowing histological assessment. A newly developed generation of FNB needles has demonstrated an outstanding diagnostic accuracy of over 95% for solid pancreatic lesions and provides samples appropriate for ancillary testing, such as immunohistochemistry and tumour molecular profiling. As a result, EUS-FNB is rapidly replacing EUS-FNA and is now the recommended technique for EUS-guided tissue acquisition in pancreatic cancer. Furthermore, with the recent expansion of neoadjuvant treatment criteria and with the advent of novel and personalised anti-cancer therapies, EUS-FNB is gaining a pivotal role in pancreatic cancer management and might soon be generalised to all patients, independent of disease stage. In this article, the authors present an updated review of the role of EUS-guided tissue acquisition in pancreatic cancer. Current indications, several technical aspects and new applications of EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB are discussed.

[Treatment of Renal Artery Perforation with Covered Stent after Percutaneous Biopsy of Pancreatic Head]

HISTORY AND CLINICAL FINDING

 In a 67-year-old female patient with upper abdominal pain, computed tomography showed a partly calcified swelling of the pancreatic head and wall thickening of the duodenum.

EXAMINATIONS

 Inpatient physical examination findings were normal. Laboratory showed increased pancreatic enzymes (amylase 210 U/l [Standard range: 28-100 U/l], lipase 2115 U/l [Standard range: 23-300 U/l]) and inflammation values (CRP 11.7 mg/l [Standard range: < 5.0 mg/l]), otherwise largely normal laboratory parameters. In the esophago-gastro-duodenoscopy, biopsy of swollen, partly stenosing mucous membrane areas in the duodenum was performed.

DIAGNOSIS

 Histology revealed partial erosive duodenitis, no evidence of a malignant tumor. If chronic calcifying pancreatitis was suspected, a sonographically guided percutaneous biopsy of the pancreatic head was performed to exclude a tumor.

TREATMENT AND COURSE

 Post-biopsy, the patient developed abdominal pain and temporary circulatory instability with nausea/vomiting and a drop in Hb to 7.5 g/dl [Standard range: 12.3-15.3 g/dl]. The sonographic suspicion of a retroperitoneal hematoma was confirmed by computed tomography. The cause was a haemorrhage from a renal artery perforation on the right side, which could be stopped by immediate angiographic intervention with a covered stent.

CONCLUSION

 After percutaneous biopsy, vascular perforation must always be considered. Computed tomography provides a reliable and quick diagnosis. Minimally invasive percutaneous insertion of a covered stent is the therapy of choice in the case of a renal artery accessible to stents.

Clinical and Technical Guideline for Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-Guided Tissue Acquisition of Pancreatic Solid Tumor: Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE)

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor requires a strict recommendation for its proper use in clinical practice because of its technical difficulty and invasiveness. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE) appointed a task force to draft clinical practice guidelines for EUS-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor. The strength of recommendation and the level of evidence for each statement were graded according to the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014. The committee, comprising a development panel of 16 endosonographers and an expert on guideline development methodology, developed 12 evidence-based recommendations in eight categories intended to help physicians make evidence-based clinical judgments with regard to the diagnosis of pancreatic solid tumor. This clinical practice guideline discusses EUS-guided sampling in pancreatic solid tumor and makes recommendations on circumstances that warrant its use, technical issues related to maximizing the diagnostic yield (e.g., needle type, needle diameter, adequate number of needle passes, sample obtaining techniques, and methods of specimen processing), adverse events of EUS-guided tissue acquisition, and learning-related issues. This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This guideline may not be applicable for all clinical situations and should be interpreted in light of specific situations and the availability of resources. It will be revised as necessary to cover progress and changes in technology and evidence from clinical practice.

Clinical and Technical Guideline for Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-Guided Tissue Acquisition of Pancreatic Solid Tumor: Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE)

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor requires a strict recommendation for its proper use in clinical practice because of its technical difficulty and invasiveness. The Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE) appointed a task force to draft clinical practice guidelines for EUS-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor. The strength of recommendation and the level of evidence for each statement were graded according to the Minds Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014. The committee, comprising a development panel of 16 endosonographers and an expert on guideline development methodology, developed 12 evidence-based recommendations in eight categories intended to help physicians make evidence-based clinical judgments with regard to the diagnosis of pancreatic solid tumor. This clinical practice guideline discusses EUS-guided sampling in pancreatic solid tumor and makes recommendations on circumstances that warrant its use, technical issues related to maximizing the diagnostic yield (e.g., needle type, needle diameter, adequate number of needle passes, sample obtaining techniques, and methods of specimen processing), adverse events of EUS-guided tissue acquisition, and learning-related issues. This guideline was reviewed by external experts and suggests best practices recommended based on the evidence available at the time of preparation. This guideline may not be applicable for all clinical situations and should be interpreted in light of specific situations and the availability of resources. It will be revised as necessary to cover progress and changes in technology and evidence from clinical practice.