Diagnosis of pancreatic neoplasia with EUS and FNA: a report of accuracy

Clinical factors associated with accuracy of EUS-FNA for pancreatic or peripancreatic solid mass without on-site cytopathologists

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUSFNA) is a safe and effective technique for tissue diagnosis in patients with pancreatic or peripancreatic solid masses. However, the procedure is difficult to accomplish without an on-site cytopathologist. The aims of this study were to examine the outcomes of EUS-FNA for pancreatic or peripancreatic solid masses without an on-site cytopathologist and to determine the factors associated with diagnostic accuracy.

METHODS

From December 2005 to November 2011, 230 patients with pancreatic or peripancreatic solid masses had 240 EUS-FNAs performed without an on-site cytopathologist. The medical records of the 230 patients from a single tertiary center were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Among the 230 patients who underwent EUS-FNA, 201 patients (88%) had malignancy, which included 171 adenocarcinomas (74%). Assuming that the cytopathological malignancy was positive or suspicious for malignant cells with cytology, the accuracy without an on-site cytopathologist was 67.9%. However, the accuracy increased from 40.0% for the first 30 cases (from 2006 to 2008) to 83.3% for the last 30 cases (in 2011) and was constantly over 80.0% starting from the sixth octile onwards for every 30 cases (in 2011). From the analysis of factors associated with the accuracy of the diagnosis using logistic regression analysis, the number of needle passes and the experience of endosonographer were statistically associated with the diagnostic accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

In the case of performing EUS-FNA for pancreatic or peripancreatic solid masses without an on-site cytopathologist, the experience of the endosonographer, and the number of needle passes were associated with the diagnostic accuracy.

Impact of rapid on-site evaluation on the adequacy of endoscopic-ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) has the potential to improve adequacy rates for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of solid pancreatic lesions, but its impact is context-dependent. No studies exist that summarize the relationship between ROSE, number of needle passes, and resulting adequacy rates.

AIMS

To analyze data from previous studies to establish if ROSE is associated with improved adequacy rates; to evaluate the relationship between ROSE, number of needle passes, and the resulting adequacy rates of EUS-FNA for solid pancreatic lesions.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting the adequacy rates for EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic lesions.

RESULTS

The search produced 3822 original studies, of which 70 studies met our inclusion criteria. The overall average adequacy rate was 96.2% (95% confidence interval: 95.5, 96.9). ROSE was associated with a statistically significant improvement of up to 3.5% in adequacy rates. There was heterogeneity in adequacy rates across all subgroups. No association between the assessor type and adequacy rates was found. Studies with ROSE have high per-case adequacy and a relatively high number of needle passes in contrast to non-ROSE studies. ROSE is an effect modifier of the relationship between number of needle passes and adequacy.

CONCLUSIONS

ROSE is associated with up to 3.5% improvement in adequacy rates for EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic lesions. ROSE assessor type has no impact on adequacy rates. ROSE is an effect modifier on the relationship between needle passes and per-case adequacy for EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic lesions.

Diagnostic evaluation of solid pancreatic masses

Determining the etiology of a solid pancreatic lesion is a critical first step toward developing an appropriate treatment plan for patients with a benign or malignant pancreatic mass. Technological advances in cross-sectional and endoscopic imaging modalities offer pancreatic imaging options with degrees of resolution that were not available even 15-20 years ago. In most cases, the nature of a solid pancreatic mass can be determined using computerized tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and endoscopic ultrasound with fine-needle aspiration. Knowledge about the basics of these modalities, as well as their strengths and limitations, plays an important role in understanding how patients with solid pancreatic masses should be evaluated.

Cystic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: the value of cytology in preoperative diagnosis

BACKGROUND

Cystic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (cPanNETs) account for 13% to 17% of PanNETs. Although the value of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) imaging and cyst fluid analysis (CFA) in their preoperative diagnosis has been well described, limited information is available about the diagnostic role of cytology samples obtained from fine-needle aspiration (FNA).

METHODS

Cytopathology records between 1992 and 2013 were searched for all reports of cysts interpreted as PanNET. Patient demographics, clinical and radiologic information, CFA, histopathology, and cytopathology findings were recorded. Performance characteristics of cytology and EUS for the accurate diagnosis of cPanNET were calculated.

RESULTS

In total, 35 FNAs from 33 patients with cPanNETs were identified, and 34 EUS were performed. Cytology made a specific diagnosis of a cPanNET in 71% of the biopsies compared with a specific diagnosis by EUS in 38% of cases. An interpretation of suspicious for cPanNET was given in 77% of cases by cytology and in 47% by EUS. Cytology identified 86% of the lesions as high-risk pancreatic cysts compared with 56% by EUS. Diagnostic morphology was present on both cytology and cell block preparations in 60% of aspirates, on cytology only in 20%, and on cell block only in 20%. CFA was performed on 51% cyst fluids. All cysts but 1 revealed low carcinoembryonic antigen levels (range, 0.2 to >500 ng/mL; mean, 29.5 ng/mL), and amylase levels were <500 U/L in all but 2 cases (range, 16-1493 U/L; mean, 205 U/L).

CONCLUSIONS

Cytology is the most accurate test for preoperative diagnosis of cPanNETs. EUS is insufficiently accurate for independent diagnosis, and carcinoembryonic antigen and amylase analyses are noncontributory.

Significance of the diagnostic categories "atypical" and "suspicious for malignancy" in the cytologic diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses

Endoscopic ultrasound guided (EUS) fine-needle aspiration (FNA) investigation of solid pancreatic lesions has been shown to have good sensitivity and specificity. Many lesions can be definitely classified as benign or malignant but some can only be cytologically classified as "atypical" or "suspicious for malignancy". Risk for malignancy in these indeterminate categories has not been well categorized. The cytology records of four University Medical centers were searched for all EUS guided FNAs of solid pancreatic lesions. All cases with a diagnosis of "atypical", or "suspicious for malignancy" were selected for analysis when histologic biopsy or over 18 months clinical follow-up was available. Two hundred and ninety-two cases with a diagnosis of "atypical" or "suspicious for malignancy" and adequate follow-up were obtained from the combined data of the four institutions. The percentage malignant for the categories "atypical" and "suspicious for malignancy" were 79.2 and 96.3%, respectively. If the category "atypical" was classified as benign and "suspicious for malignancy" was classified as malignant, the resulting positive predictive value was 96.3 (95% CI: 92.6-98.5) and the negative predictive value 20.8 (95% CI: 13.4-30.0). The categories of "atypical" and "suspicious for malignancy" stratify risk for malignancy in a fashion, which may aid in patient counseling and selection of follow-up protocols. Classification of "suspicious for malignancy" as malignant optimizes diagnostic sensitivity and specificity.

Standardized terminology and nomenclature for pancreatobiliary cytology: the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology guidelines

The Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology has developed a set of guidelines for pancreatobiliary cytology including indications for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) biopsy, techniques of EUS-FNA, terminology and nomenclature of pancreatobiliary disease, ancillary testing, and postbiopsy treatment and management. All documents are based on the expertise of the authors, a review of the literature, discussions of the draft document at several national and international meetings over an 18-month period and synthesis of online comments of the draft document on the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology web site (www.papsociety.org). This document selectively presents the results of these discussions and focuses on a proposed standardized terminology scheme for pancreatobiliary specimens that correlate cytological diagnosis with biological behavior and increasingly conservative patient management of surveillance only. The proposed terminology scheme recommends a six-tiered system: Nondiagnostic, Negative, Atypical, Neoplastic (benign or other), Suspicious and Positive. Unique to this scheme is the "Neoplastic" category separated into "benign" (serous cystadenoma), or "Other" (premalignant mucinous cysts, neuroendocrine tumors, and solid-pseudopapillary neoplasms). The positive or malignant category is reserved for high-grade, aggressive malignancies including ductal adenocarcinoma, acinar cell carcinoma, poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas, pancreatoblastoma, lymphoma, and metastases. Interpretation categories do not have to be used. Some pathology laboratory information systems require an interpretation category, which places the cytological diagnosis into a general category. This proposed scheme provides terminology that standardizes the category of the various diseases of the pancreas, some of which are difficult to diagnose specifically by cytology. In addition, this terminology scheme attempts to provide maximum flexibility for patient management, which has become increasingly conservative for some neoplasms.

Current options for the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis

The diagnostic options for chronic pancreatitis have evolved over recent years. The previous gold standard references for structural imaging and exocrine pancreatic function testing have both been supplanted and redesigned. Endoscopic retrograde pancreatography has now been overtaken by endoscopic ultrasound and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, whilst the old technique for Dreiling tube pancreatic function testing has now been replaced by the endoscopic pancreatic function test. New advances in endoscopic ultrasound elastography have also extended the options for evaluating pancreatic masses to differentiate mass-forming chronic pancreatitis from malignancy. Genetic contribution to chronic pancreatitis is also now more widely recognized than ever before.

Tips to overcome technical challenges in EUS-guided tissue acquisition

The diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA depends on several factors, such as the experience of the endosonographer, the characteristics of the lesion, the clinical status of the patient, the size and type of needles, the methods of specimen preparation, as well as cytopathologist expertise. The endosonographic technique can be improved when several tips and tricks useful to overcome challenges of FNA are known. Technical challenges of FNA are related to the characteristics of the lesion and its surroundings, sonographic imaging, and limitations related to the needle. Several tips and tricks necessary to overcome them are presented in this review.

Basic technique in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for solid lesions: How many passes?

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has evolved to become an indispensable tool for tissue acquisition in patients with luminal and extra luminal gastrointestinal cancers. Despite the extensive use of EUS-FNA, there still exists a wide variation in the number of samples required to ensure acquisition of diagnostic material from different kind of lesions. There are several factors that may influence the number of fine needle passes made during EUS-FNA, but the main factor seems to be the presence of a Cytopathologist during the EUS procedure. The diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA with rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) in most studies exceeds 90%. Nevertheless, ROSE is not available in many centers. Various studies have investigated the adequate number of needle passes that should be performed if ROSE is not used. Differences exist based on the nature of the target lesion: Five to seven passes for pancreatic masses, three passes for lymphnodes, only one pass for pancreatic cystic lesions. Consider using a core biopsy needle or a 19-G FNA needle for histology could improve the diagnostic yield. Even though EUS-FNA is widely available, some patients still do not receive conclusive diagnoses upon initial EUS-FNA. One way to maximize the benefits for patients might be to centralize cases to several well-equipped, high-volume centers with experienced endosonographers that have universal availability of ROSE.

Malignancy risk associated with diagnostic categories defined by the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology pancreaticobiliary guidelines

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is currently the predominant method for obtaining a preoperative tissue diagnosis for pancreatic lesions suspicious for malignancy. The diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of EUS-FNA are well documented, but malignancy risk associated with the diagnostic categories proposed by the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology is poorly defined.

METHODS

The records of the Departments of Pathology at Duke University and the University of Utah were searched for all cases of EUS-FNA performed for the investigation of pancreatic lesions. All cases with follow-up surgical diagnosis or greater than 3 years of clinical follow-up were selected. Cytologic diagnostic categories were "nondiagnostic," "benign," "atypical (not otherwise specified)," "suspicious for malignancy," "neoplasm," and "malignant." Correlation of cytologic diagnosis with surgical and/or clinical follow-up was made and risk of malignancy calculated for each category.

RESULTS

Three hundred seventeen EUS-FNAs with adequate surgical or clinical follow-up were obtained. Risk of malignancy for nondiagnostic specimens was 21%;, benign specimens, 13%; atypical cases, 74%; suspicious for malignancy, 82%; the neoplasm category, 14%; and the malignant category, 97%

CONCLUSIONS

The cytologic categories proposed by the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology demonstrate an increasing risk for malignancy extending from benign to malignant. Aspirates designated benign have the lowest risk of malignancy (13%) and aspirates designated malignant the highest (97%). The proposed categorization scheme stratifies risk for malignancy giving useful information to clinicians treating patients with pancreatic lesions.

Diagnostic ability and factors affecting accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for pancreatic solid lesions: Japanese large single center experience

BACKGROUND

Several studies have investigated the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for pancreatic lesions, but they have included only limited patient populations. This study aimed to clarify the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA in a large number of pancreatic lesions, and to describe the factors that influence it.

METHODS

From March 1997 to May 2010, 944 consecutive patients who had undergone EUS-FNA for pancreatic solid lesions were evaluated retrospectively. Factors affecting EUS-FNA accuracy were then analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 996 solid pancreatic lesions were sampled by EUS-FNA. The overall sampling adequacy and diagnostic accuracy of these lesions were 99.3 % (989/996) and 91.8 % (918/996), respectively. The sensitivity and specificity for differentiating malignant from benign lesions were 91.5 % (793/867) and 97.7 % (126/129), respectively. The diagnostic performance was significantly higher when both cytological and cell-block examinations were carried out than with only cytological examination. In multivariate analysis, final diagnosis, location of lesion, lesion size, availability of on-site cytopathological evaluation, and experience of EUS-FNA procedure were independent factors affecting the accuracy of EUS-FNA. On-site cytopathological evaluation and lesion size were found to be the most weighted factors affecting diagnostic accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-FNA for pancreatic solid lesions yielded a high accuracy and low complication rate. Both cytological and cell-block preparations and on-site cytopathological evaluation contributed to improve the accuracy. The diagnostic ability of EUS-FNA was less for smaller lesions, and repeated procedures may be needed if malignancy is suspected.

Fine-needle aspiration cytology in Ethiopia

CONTEXT

Most of the population in Ethiopia lives below the poverty line with severely limited access to health care. The burden of infectious diseases is high, but benign and malignant neoplasms are also encountered frequently. For diagnosis of palpable lesions in this setting, fine-needle aspiration biopsy is the method of choice.

OBJECTIVE

To present findings from several patients from 3 major hospitals in Ethiopia who underwent fine-needle aspiration biopsy.

DATA SOURCES

Representative cytopathology cases of routinely encountered problems are shown. Often patients present with clinically advanced lesions. Staffing, technique, and equipment used for fine-needle aspiration biopsy are described at Black Lion Hospital (Addis Ababa), the University of Gonder Hospital (Gonder), and Ayder Referral Hospital of Mekelle University in the Tigray region of northern Ethiopia.

CONCLUSIONS

Fine-needle aspiration biopsy is a highly effective method for diagnosis of mass lesions, especially in an environment with sparse health care resources, such as Ethiopia. This article illustrates the work of Ethiopian cytopathologists and emphasizes the constraints under which they perform their work.

The presence of a cytopathologist increases the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration cytology for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

A meta-analysis has not been previously performed to evaluate critically the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of solely pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and address factors that have an impact on variability of accuracy. The aim of this study was to determine whether the presence of a cytopathologist, variability of the reference standard and other sources of heterogeneity significantly impacts diagnostic accuracy.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search to identify studies, in which the pooled sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios for a positive or negative test (LR+, LR-) and summary receiver-operating curves (SROC) could be determined for EUS-FNA of the pancreas for ductal adenocarcinoma using clinical follow-up, and/or surgical biopsy or excision as the reference standard.

RESULTS

We included 34 distinct studies (3644 patients) in which EUS-FNA for a solid pancreatic mass was evaluated. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for EUS-FNA for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma was 88.6% [95% confidence interval (CI): 87.2-89.9] and 99.3% (95% CI: 98.7-99.7), respectively. The LR+ and LR- were 33.46 (95% CI: 20.76-53.91) and 0.11 (95% CI: 0.08-0.16), respectively. The meta-regression model showed rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) (P = 0.001) remained a significant determinant of EUS-FNA accuracy after correcting for study population number and reference standard.

CONCLUSION

EUS-FNA is an effective modality for diagnosing pancreatic ductal adencarcinoma in solid pancreatic lesions, with an increased diagnostic accuracy when using on-site cytopathology evaluation.

Randomized trial comparing fanning with standard technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic mass lesions

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

The fanning technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS - FNA) involves sampling multiple areas within a lesion with each pass. The aim of this study was to compare the fanning and standard techniques for EUS - FNA of solid pancreatic masses.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients with solid pancreatic mass lesions were randomized to undergo EUS - FNA using either the standard or the fanning technique. The main outcome measure was the median number of passes required to establish diagnosis. The secondary outcome measures were the diagnostic accuracy, technical failure, and complication rate of the two techniques.

RESULTS

Of 54 patients, 26 were randomized to the standard technique and 28 to the fanning technique. There was no difference in diagnostic accuracy (76.9 % vs. 96.4 %; P = 0.05), technical failure or complication rates (none in either cohort). There was a significant difference in both the number of passes required to establish diagnosis (median 1 [interquartile range 1 - 3] vs. 1 [1 - 1]; P = 0.02) and the percentage of patients in whom a diagnosis was achieved on pass one (57.7 % vs. 85.7 %; P = 0.02) between the standard and fanning groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The fanning technique of FNA was superior to the standard approach because fewer passes were required to establish the diagnosis. If these promising data are confirmed by other investigators, consideration should be given to incorporating the fanning technique into routine practice of EUS - FNA. Registered at Clinical Trials.gov (NCT 01501903).

High single-pass diagnostic yield of a new 25-gauge core biopsy needle for EUS-guided FNA biopsy in solid pancreatic lesions

BACKGROUND

Current limitations of EUS-guided FNA include the need for multiple passes and on-site cytology assessment and lack of core specimen. Recently, a new 25-gauge core biopsy needle (PC25) was developed to overcome these limitations.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the diagnostic yield of EUS-guided FNA aspiration biopsy (FNAB) when using the PC25 needle among patients with solid pancreatic lesions.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis.

SETTING

Academic tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Fifty consecutive patients with a solid pancreatic lesion underwent EUS-guided FNAB with PC25.

INTERVENTIONS

EUS-guided FNAB with PC25.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcome was the diagnostic yield in single and overall passes of EUS-guided FNAB when using the PC25 needle for pancreatic solid lesions.

RESULTS

Cytologic analysis showed malignancy in 38 patients on the first pass, with a cumulative sensitivity of 83%, 91%, and 96% on passes 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Although visible core was reported in 46 patients (92%), histologic core was seen in 16 patients (32%). Histologic analysis showed malignancy in 29 patients on the first pass, with a cumulative sensitivity of 63% and 87% on pass 1 and passes 1 to 4, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in combined cytologic and histologic results were 85%, 100%, and 86% for single pass and 96%, 100%, and 96% on multiple passes, respectively. No complications were seen.

LIMITATIONS

A retrospective study design at a single center using a single arm.

CONCLUSION

EUS-guided FNAB with the PC25 needle showed excellent single-pass and overall diagnostic yields. This needle appears to maintain a high cytologic yield, similar to standard 25-gauge FNA needles, while also providing some histologic core tissue.

Clinicoradiologic characteristics and outcomes of metastatic cancer to the pancreas and double primary pancreatic cancer

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to identify clinicoradiologic characteristics to distinguish metastatic cancer to the pancreas (MCP) from double primary pancreatic cancer (DPPC).

METHODS

From 2000 to 2011, we retrospectively identified MCP and DPPC patients among patients with histories of other primary malignancies.

RESULTS

A total of 94 patients with histories of other primary malignancies were histologically confirmed to have pancreatic cancer. Among them, 34 patients had MCP and 60 patients had DPPC, which were ductal adenocarcinomas. The kidney was the most common primary cancer site that metastasized to the pancreas (12, 35.3%). In the DPPC group, the stomach was the most common primary cancer site (11, 18.3%). There were 21 patients (61.8%) with metachronous pancreatic cancer in the MCP group and 29 (48.3%) in the DPPC group (P=0.210). Among the metachronous pancreatic cancer patients, the disease-free interval was 88.3 months in the MCP group, and 49.6 months in the DPPC group (P=0.062). The number of the patients who showed elevated CA 19-9 levels was higher in the DPPC group than in the MCP group (39 (65%) vs. 9 (26.5%); P=0.001). Total bilirubin (P=0.006) and fasting plasma glucose (P=0.050) were also higher in the DPPC group. The numbers of patients who showed pancreatic duct dilatation (P=0.002) and pancreatic atrophy (P=0.008) on radiographs were meaningfully higher in the DPPC group than in the MCP group. On the other hand, the numbers of patients who showed well demarcated tumor margin (P<0.000), tumor necrosis (P=0.002), enhancement (P=0.005) and distant metastasis (P=0.028) were significantly higher in the MCP group than in the DPPC group. We evaluated differences in survival between the two groups. The median survival time in the MCP group (55 months) was significantly longer than that in the DPPC group (20 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Other than elevated levels of CA 19-9, total bilirubin and fasting glucose, radiologic findings were the most reliable factors for distinguishing the MCP from the DPPC.

The role of cytology in the preoperative assessment and management of patients with pancreaticobiliary tract neoplasms

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and bile duct brushings are utilized in the cytologic evaluation of solid and cystic pancreaticobiliary tract lesions. We sought to determine the diagnostic accuracy of cytology.

METHODS

Five hundred seventy-nine pancreatic resections with 727 corresponding cytology specimens were identified from 1997 to 2012. Histologic diagnoses included benign, carcinoma, pancreatic endocrine neoplasm (PEN), nonepithelial neoplasms, cystic neoplasms, and ampullary adenomas. Standard interpretative categories-nondiagnostic, negative, atypical, suspicious, and positive--were utilized for preoperative cytology specimens.

RESULTS

For solid masses, the sensitivity and specificity of positive fine-needle aspiration (FNA) cytology for detecting carcinoma were 74 and 100 %, respectively. FNAs performed better than brushings (sensitivity, 40 %; specificity, 98 %) in detecting carcinomas. Similar findings were seen for PENs and nonepithelial neoplasms. For cystic lesions, the sensitivity of FNA for predicting malignancy was lower (24 %) with a specificity of 97 %. Sequentially combining suspicious and atypical categories with the positive category resulted in increases in sensitivity and decreases in specificity for all cases except for cystic lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

Cytology adds to the assessment of solid masses, but its utility in cystic lesions is less clear. Consideration of a suspicious cytologic interpretation as a positive diagnosis for triaging patients to surgery is supported by our study.

Endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration characteristics of primary adenocarcinoma versus other malignant neoplasms of the pancreas

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) with fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is often used to assist in the evaluation of pancreatic lesions and may help to diagnose benign versus malignant neoplasms. However, there is a paucity of literature regarding comparative EUS characteristics of various malignant pancreatic neoplasms (primary and metastatic).

OBJECTIVE

To compare and characterize primary pancreatic adenocarcinoma versus other malignant neoplasms, hereafter referred to as nonprimary pancreatic adenocarcinoma (NPPA), diagnosed by EUS-guided FNA.

METHODS

The present study was a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database. The setting was a tertiary care, academic medical centre. Patients referred for suspected pancreatic neoplasms were evaluated. Based on EUS-FNA characteristics, primary pancreatic adenocarcinoma was differentiated from other malignant neoplasms. The subset of other neoplasms was defined as malignant lesions that were 'NPPAs' (ie, predominantly solid or solid⁄cystic based on EUS appearance and primary malignant lesions or metastatic lesions to the pancreas). Pancreatic masses that were benign cystic lesions (pseudocyst, simple cyst, serous cystadenoma) and focal inflammatory lesions (acute, chronic and autoimmune pancreatitis) were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 230 patients were evaluated using EUS-FNA for suspected pancreatic mass lesions. Thirty-eight patients were excluded because they were diagnosed with inflammatory lesions or had purely benign cysts. One hundred ninety-two patients had confirmed malignant pancreatic neoplasms (ie, pancreatic adenocarcinoma [n=144], NPPA [n=48]). When comparing adenocarcinoma with NPPA lesions, there was no significant difference in mean age (P=0.0675), sex (P=0.3595) or average lesion size (P=0.3801). On average, four FNA passes were necessary to establish a cytological diagnosis in both lesion subtypes (P=0.396). Adenocarcinomas were more likely to be located in the pancreatic head (P=0.0198), whereas masses in the tail were more likely to be NPPAs (P=0.0006). Adenocarcinomas were also more likely to exhibit vascular invasion (OR 4.37; P=0.0011), malignant lymphadenopathy (P=0.0006), pancreatic duct dilation (OR 2.4; P=0.022) and common bile duct dilation (OR 2.87; P=0.039).

CONCLUSIONS

Adenocarcinoma was more likely to be present in the head of the pancreas, have lymph node and vascular involvement, as well as evidence of pancreatic duct and common bile duct obstruction. Of all malignant pancreatic lesions analyzed by EUS-FNA, 25% were NPPA, suggesting that FNA is crucial in establishing a diagnosis and may be helpful in preoperative planning.

Effectiveness of combined endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy and stenting in patients with suspected pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNA) can be coupled with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the same setting when biliary and/or duodenal stenting are required.

AIMS

Our aim was to examine the effectiveness of EUS-FNA combined with stenting during the same session in patients with pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Consecutive patients referred for EUS-FNA of a pancreatic mass with symptoms of biliary (±upper digestive) obstruction were included. Consecutive patients undergoing biliary and/or duodenal stenting without EUS-FNA during the same period were used as controls. Procedure-related complications were the primary outcome measure. Duration of the procedure, ability to achieve biliary/duodenal stenting, the yield of EUS-FNA, and clinical outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 122 patients underwent combined EUS-FNA and stenting and 68 underwent stenting alone (control group). In the combined group, histological proof of cancer was obtained in 88.52% at first EUS-FNA and 95.08% after a second EUS-FNA. Biliary stent placement was successful in 97.5 and 98% in the combined and the control groups, respectively. There was no statistical difference between the groups for length of stay after endoscopy and for procedure-related mortality and morbidity within 30 days. The median time from endoscopy to chemotherapy in the combined group was 12 days.

CONCLUSION

Combined EUS-FNA and biliary and/or duodenal stenting is feasible in almost all patients with suspected pancreatic cancer, with no additional hazard and a high histological yield.

Pancreatic involvement by plasma cell neoplasms

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic involvement by plasma cell neoplasms is an extremely rare event, with only 50 cases described in the literature. They can present as a primary solitary extramedullary plasmacytoma or plasmacytoma secondary to a plasma cell myeloma. Clinical manifestations are due to the presence of a pancreatic mass usually in the pancreas head, which causes extra-biliary obstruction and abdominal pain.

METHODS

Abdominal imaging including CT scan or endoscopic ultrasound with fine-needle aspiration tissue sampling is essential for the initial diagnostic procedure. However, immunohistochemical analysis of the biopsy specimen or flow cytometry of the aspirated material is crucial to prove the monoclonality and the final diagnosis of a plasma cell neoplasm.

DISCUSSION

Management of these situations include radiotherapy, chemotherapy, surgery or combined therapy. Novel medications including the immunomodulatory drugs or the proteasome inhibitors followed by consolidation with intensive chemotherapy and haematopoietic stem cell transplantation are nowadays used as upfront treatment in the cases associated to a plasma cell myeloma.

CONCLUSION

Despite the rarity, plasma cell neoplasms should be considered in the differential diagnosis of obstructive jaundice and pancreatic neoplasms since they are potentially treatable situations.

Factors affecting the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for upper gastrointestinal submucosal or extraluminal solid mass lesions

AIM

A number of potential variables are associated with the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). The aim of this study was to evaluate factors affecting the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA for upper gastrointestinal submucosal or extraluminal solid lesions.

METHODS

Patients with such lesions who underwent EUS-FNA between January 2009 and December 2010 were studied retrospectively. Needles of 22, 25 and 19 gauge were used. The associations between the EUS-FNA results and factors such as mass location, mass size, needle size, number of needle passes, combined histologic-cytologic analysis and final diagnosis were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 170 EUS-FNA procedures were performed in 158 patients with upper gastrointestinal submucosal or extraluminal solid lesions. The overall accuracy of EUS-FNA was 86.5% (147/170). The diagnostic accuracy with three or more needle passes was higher than with less than 3.0 needle passes (90.0%, 108/120 vs 78.0%, 39/50; P < 0.05). Mass location, mass size, and final diagnosis were not associated with EUS-FNA accuracy. Combined cytologic-histologic analysis had significantly higher diagnostic accuracy than either cytologic or histologic analysis alone (P < 0.001). In a subgroup of 90 patients, both 22 and 25 gauge needles were used for EUS-FNA. The overall diagnostic accuracy was similar for 25 gauge needles and 22 gauge needles (80.0% vs 78.9% P = 1.000) in this subgroup.

CONCLUSION

Overall, 25 and 22 gauge needles have a similar diagnostic accuracy. Our results suggest that 3.0 or more needle passes and combined cytologic-histologic analysis enhance the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA.

Human pancreatic cancer fusion 2 (HPC2) 1-B3: a novel monoclonal antibody to screen for pancreatic ductal dysplasia

BACKGROUND.: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is rarely detected early enough for patients to be cured. The objective of the authors was to develop a monoclonal antibody to distinguish adenocarcinoma and precancerous intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia (IPMN) from benign epithelium. METHODS.: Mice were immunized with human pancreatic adenocarcinoma cells and monoclonal antibodies were screened against a panel of archived pancreatic tissue sections, including pancreatitis (23 cases), grade 1 IPMN (16 cases), grade 2 IPMN (9 cases), grade 3 IPMN (13 cases), and various grades of adenocarcinoma (17 cases). One monoclonal antibody, human pancreatic cancer fusion 2 (HPC2) 1-B3, which specifically immunostained adenocarcinoma and all grades of IPMN, was isolated. Subsequently, HPC2 1-B3 was evaluated in a retrospective series of 31 fine-needle aspiration (FNA) biopsies from clinically suspicious pancreatic lesions that had long-term clinical follow-up. RESULTS.: HPC2 1-B3 was negative in all 31 cases of chronic pancreatitis that were tested. In contrast, HPC2 1-B3 immunostained the cytoplasm and luminal surface of all 16 well- to moderately differentiated pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas. It demonstrated only weak focal staining of poorly differentiated carcinomas. All high-grade IPMNs were found to be positive for HPC2 1-B3. The majority of low-grade to intermediate-grade IPMNs were positive (66% of cases). Immunostaining a separate series of pancreatic FNA cell blocks for HPC2 1-B3 demonstrated that the relative risk for detecting at least low-grade dysplasia (2.0 [95% confidence interval, 1.23-3.26]) was statistically significant (P = .002 by the Fisher exact test). CONCLUSIONS.: To reduce the mortality of pancreatic cancer, more effective early screening methods are necessary. The data from the current study indicate that a novel monoclonal antibody, HPC2 1-B3, may facilitate the diagnosis of early pancreatic dysplasia.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration of lymph nodes and solid masses: factors influencing the cellularity and adequacy of the aspirate

GOALS

To study the factors that influence the cellularity and adequacy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA).

BACKGROUND

An on-site cytopathology service is preferred during EUS-guided FNA. However, this is not always available. Factors that influence the aspirate cellularity and adequacy have not been well defined in the absence of on-site cytopathology.

STUDY

EUS-guided FNA procedures without an on-site cytopathologist from a single center were retrospectively studied. FNA of solid masses and lymph nodes (LN) were included. The FNA cellularity, hemorrhagic content, and endoscopists' assessment of adequacy were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 166 patients from January 2009 to October 2010 were included. A total of 520 FNA passes were performed. Of the 166 lesions, 70 (42.2%) were solid masses and 96 (57.8%) were LNs. A 22-G needle was used in 72.3% and 25 G in 27.7% of the patients. The median (range) number of FNA passes was 3 (1 to 7) for LNs and 3 (1 to 5) for solid masses. With this, the endoscopists had an accuracy of 92.2% (153/166) for obtaining an adequate aspirate. Of the 166 samples, 4 (2.4%) were acellular, 20 (12.0%) sparsely cellular, 52 (31.4%) moderately cellular, and 90 (54.2%) highly cellular. The 25-G needle had significantly more adequate aspirates than the 22-G needle for solid masses (P=0.011). Also, increasing passes correlated with higher cellularity (P=0.002) and an adequate aspirate (P=0.021). No correlation was found for LN FNA. Lesion size did not influence the cellularity or adequacy (P>0.05). The degree of hemorrhage was not influenced by the needle gauge, number of passes, or lesion size. The diagnostic yield was not affected by hemorrhage in the sample (P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-guided FNA obtains a high proportion of adequate aspirates for LNs and solid masses, even without an on-site cytopathologist. Small proportions of inadequate samples still occur. For solid masses, a 25-G needle with at least 3 passes is more likely to provide an adequate aspirate than a 22-G needle and fewer passes. Hemorrhage did not affect the cytopathology's ability to make a diagnosis.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine needle aspiration: Relatively low sensitivity in the endosonographer population

AIM: To assess the characteristics and quality of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in a large panel of endosonographers.

METHODS: A survey was conducted during the 13th annual live course of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) held in Amsterdam, Netherlands. A 2-page questionnaire was developed for the study. Content validity of the questionnaire was determined based on input by experts in the field and a review of the relevant literature. It contained 30 questions that pertained to demographics and the current practice for EUS-FNA of responders, including sampling technique, sample processing, cytopathological diagnosis and sensitivity of EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of solid mass lesions. One hundred and sixty-one endosonographers who attended the course were asked to answer the survey. This allowed assessing the current practice of EUS-FNA as well as the self-reported sensitivity of EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of solid mass lesions. We also examined which factors were associated with a self-reported sensitivity of EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of solid mass lesions > 80%.

RESULTS: Completed surveys were collected from 92 (57.1%) of 161 endosonographers who attended the conference. The endosonographers had been practicing endoscopy and EUS for 12.5 ± 7.8 years and 4.8 ± 4.1 years, respectively; one third of them worked in a hospital with an annual caseload > 100 EUS-FNA. Endoscopy practices were located in 29 countries, including 13 countries in Western Europe that totaled 75.3% of the responses. Only one third of endosonographers reported a sensitivity for the diagnosis of solid mass lesions > 80% (interquartile range of sensitivities, 25.0%-75.0%). Factors independently associated with a sensitivity > 80% were (1) > 7 needle passes for pancreatic lesions or rapid on-site cytopathological evaluation (ROSE) (P < 0.0001), (2) a high annual hospital caseload (P = 0.024) and (3) routine isolation of microcores from EUS-FNA samples (P = 0.042). ROSE was routinely available to 27.9% of respondents. For lymph nodes and pancreatic masses, a maximum of three needle passes was performed by approximately two thirds of those who did not have ROSE. Microcores were routinely harvested from EUS-FNA samples by approximately one third (37.2%) of survey respondents.

CONCLUSION: EUS-FNA sensitivity was considerably lower than reported in the literature. Low EUS-FNA sensitivity was associated with unavailability of ROSE, few needle passes, absence of microcore isolation and low hospital caseload.

Comparison of methods to detect neoplasia in patients undergoing endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Digital image analysis (DIA) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) can be used to evaluate biliary strictures with greater accuracy than conventional cytology (CC). We performed a prospective evaluation of the accuracy of CC, compared with that of DIA and FISH, in detection of malignancy in patients undergoing endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) fine-needle aspiration (FNA).

METHODS

We collected a minimum of 6 FNA samples from each of 250 patients during EUS. CC or DIA and FISH analyses were performed on every other specimen (from every other FNA pass); patients were randomly assigned to the first test performed. CC slides were reviewed by gastrointestinal cytopathologists who were blinded to all data. Findings from cytohistologic analysis, after a minimum 24-month follow-up period, were used as the standard (n = 202; median age, 65 years).

RESULTS

Aspirates were collected from lymph nodes (n = 111), pancreas (n = 61), gastrointestinal lumen wall (n = 9), periluminal mass (n = 4), liver (n = 8), and miscellaneous sites (n = 9). Matched samples provided a mean of 3.2 passes for CC and 1.6 passes for DIA and FISH. The data indicate a potential lack of utility for DIA. The combination of CC and FISH detected malignancy with 11% greater sensitivity than CC alone (P = .0002), but specificity was reduced from 100% to 96%.

CONCLUSIONS

FISH analysis identifies neoplastic lesions with significantly greater sensitivity than CC in patients with diverse pathologies who underwent EUS with FNA, despite limited tissue sampling for FISH analysis.

Endoscopic ultrasound elastography

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is a reference technique for diagnosing and staging several different diseases. EUS-guided biopsies and fine needle aspirations are used to improve diagnostic performance of cases where a definitive diagnosis cannot be obtained through conventional EUS. However, EUS-guided tissue sampling requires experience and is associated with a low but not negligible risk of complications. EUS elastography is a non-invasive method that can be used in combination with conventional EUS and has the potential for improving the diagnostic accuracy and reducing the need for EUS-guided tissue sampling in several situations. Elastography measures tissue stiffness by evaluating changes in the EUS image before and after the application of slight pressure to the target tissue by the ultrasonography probe. Pathologic processes such as cancerization and fibrosis alter tissue elasticity and therefore induce changes in elastographic appearance. Qualitative elastography depicts tissue stiffness using different colors, whereas quantitative elastography renders numerical results expressed as a strain ratio or hue histogram mean. EUS elastography has been proven to differentiate between benign and malignant solid pancreatic masses, as well as between benign and malignant lymph nodes with a high accuracy. Studies have also demonstrated that the early changes of chronic pancreatitis can be distinguished from normal pancreatic tissues under EUS elastography. In this article, we review the technical aspects and current clinical applications of qualitative and quantitative EUS elastography and emphasize the potential additional indications that need to be evaluated in future clinical studies.

Endoscopic ultrasound image enhancement elastography

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) represents an advance in the diagnosis and staging of several diseases. EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration is useful, but technically demanding, and can be associated with complications. Elastography emerges as a useful tool that is based on the knowledge that some diseases, like cancer, lead to a modification in tissue stiffness. Elastography evaluates the elastic properties of tissues and compares images obtained before and after compression to target tissues; differentiating benign from malignant lesions. This article reviews theoretical aspects and the methodology of EUS elastography. Clinical applications, mainly in pancreatic diseases and lymph nodes, are analyzed.

Use of samples from endoscopic ultrasound-guided 19-gauge fine-needle aspiration in diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Histologic techniques are used to distinguish autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) from pancreatic malignancies and to confirm the etiology of pancreatitis. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is a well-established technique used in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. However, it is unclear whether specimens obtained from pancreatic lesions by EUS-FNA are adequate for the histologic diagnosis of AIP, because the evaluation of tissue architecture and immunostaining assays usually require larger samples.

METHODS

We evaluated samples collected by EUS-FNA with a conventional 19-gauge needle by histologic analysis, looking for features of AIP. We analyzed data from 44 patients who were diagnosed with AIP and underwent EUS-FNA with a 19-gauge needle from January 2004 to September 2010. The FNA specimens were reviewed by histologic analysis; AIP was diagnosed based on the presence of lymphoplasmacytic sclerosing pancreatitis or immunoglobulin (Ig)G4-positive plasma cells in the infiltrate.

RESULTS

The specimen amount was inadequate from 3 patients. Among the remaining 41 patients, histopathologic analysis revealed lymphoplasmacytic sclerosing pancreatitis in 17 samples and IgG4-positive plasma cells in 5 (3 samples were positive for both); no samples had granulocytic epithelial lesions. Therefore, 19 patients (43%) were diagnosed with AIP based on histologic analysis. One patient had temporary abdominal pain.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-FNA, with a 19-gauge needle, is a safe and reliable procedure for obtaining pancreatic samples for the histologic analysis of AIP. Although it does not have a high diagnostic yield, it might be useful in patients without typical features of AIP because it would allow patients to avoid surgery.

The spectrum of hematologic malignancies involving the pancreas: potential clinical mimics of pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Hematologic malignancies often involve the pancreas, causing potential diagnostic pitfalls and, rarely, potentially avoidable surgical resection. We review the spectrum of hematologic malignancies involving the pancreas and describe features useful in preoperative distinction from adenocarcinoma. Archived clinical, pathologic, and radiologic data (1965 to present) for hematologic malignancies involving the pancreas were reviewed and compared with the data for 157 surgically resected pancreatic adenocarcinomas. Of 42 cases, 27 (64%) were clinically "suspicious" for hematologic malignancies. Of the remaining 15 cases, 4 patients underwent resection for presumed pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Isolated pancreatic masses proved most difficult to identify clinically. Significant factors in distinguishing hematologic malignancies from adenocarcinoma included history of hematologic malignancy, young age, large tumor size, low CA19-9 level, B symptoms, and lack of jaundice or diabetes mellitus. Various hematologic malignancies involve the pancreas, most commonly diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Pancreatic masses are usually correctly identified clinically. Preoperative and operative sampling is strongly recommended when hematologic malignancies cannot be excluded.

EUS-guided FNA for diagnosis of solid pancreatic neoplasms: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Preoperative diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions remains challenging despite advancement in imaging technologies. EUS has the benefit of being a minimally invasive, well-tolerated procedure, although results are operator-dependent. The addition of FNA (EUS-guided FNA) provides samples for cytopathologic analysis, a major advantage over other imaging techniques.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA for pancreatic cancer.

DESIGN

This is a meta-analysis of published studies assessing the diagnostic capability of EUS-FNA. Relevant studies were identified via MEDLINE and were included if they used a reference standard of definitive surgical histology or clinical follow-up of at least 6 months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Data from selected studies were analyzed by using test accuracy meta-analysis software, providing a pooled value for sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio, and summary receiver operating characteristic curve. Cytology results were classified as inadequate, benign, atypical, suspicious, or malignant. Predefined subgroup analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies published between 1997 and 2009 were included, with a total number of 4984 patients. The pooled sensitivity for malignant cytology was 85% (95% confidence interval [CI], 84-86), and pooled specificity was 98% (95% CI, 0.97-0.99). If atypical and suspicious cytology results were included to determine true neoplasms, the sensitivity increased to 91% (95% CI, 90-92); however, the specificity was reduced to 94% (95% CI, 93-96). The diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA was enhanced in prospective, multicenter studies.

LIMITATION

Publication bias was not a significant determinant of pooled accuracy.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrates that EUS-FNA is a highly accurate diagnostic test for solid neoplasms of the pancreas and should be considered when algorithms for investigating solid pancreatic lesions are being planned.

Direct histological processing of EUS biopsies enables rapid molecular biomarker analysis for interventional pancreatic cancer trials

OBJECTIVE

Current practice to diagnose pancreatic cancer is accomplished by endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) using a cytological approach. This method is time consuming and often fails to provide suitable specimens for modern molecular analyses. Here, we compare the cytological approach with direct formalin fixation of pancreatic EUS-FNA micro-cores and evaluate the potential to perform molecular biomarker analysis on these specimen.

METHODS

130 specimens obtained by EUS-FNA with a 22G needle were processed by the standard cytological approach and compared to a separate cohort of 130 specimens that were immediately formalin fixed to preserve micro-cores of tissue prior to routine histological processing.

RESULTS

We found that direct formalin fixation significantly shortened the time required for diagnosis from 3.6 days to 2.9 days (p<0.05) by reducing the average time (140 vs 33 min/case) and number of slides (9.65 vs 4.67 slides/case) for histopathological processing. Specificity and sensitivity yielded comparable results between the two approaches (82.3% vs 77% and 90.9% vs 100%). Importantly, EUS-FNA histology preserved the tumour tissue architecture with neoplastic glands embedded in stroma in 67.89% of diagnostic cases compared to 27.55% with the standard cytological approach (p < 0.001). Furthermore, micro-core samples were suitable for molecular studies including the immunohistochemical detection of intranuclear Hes1 in malignant cells, and the laser-capture microdissection-mediated measurement of Gli-1 mRNA in tumour stromal myofibroblasts.

CONCLUSIONS

Direct formalin fixation of pancreatic EUS-FNA micro-cores demonstrates superiority regarding diagnostic delay, costs, and specimen suitability for molecular studies. We advocate this approach for future investigational trials in pancreatic cancer patients.

microRNAs as markers of survival and chemoresistance in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

microRNAs (miRs) are a recently recognized class of noncoding short RNAs, 17-25 nucleotides in length, that play a role in post-transcriptional gene regulation by translational repression and/or mRNA degradation. Various miRs have been highlighted in pancreatic cancer development and metastasis, and as potential clinical diagnostic/prognostic biomarkers. Recently, studies have indicated that miRs are responsible for resistance to chemotherapeutic agents. The miR-10b has been identified as a 'metastamiR' in various tumor types, notably breast cancer, but data surrounding its relevance in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma has been sparse. The evaluated article presents data indicating that miR-10b is upregulated in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and can be used as a diagnostic marker in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsies of suspicious pancreatic lesions. In addition, miR-10b may be able to guide neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy and predict metastatic-free survival and overall survival.

EUS-guided fine needle aspiration and trucut needle biopsy for examination of rectal and perirectal lesions

OBJECTIVE

Few studies have assessed the diagnostic efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and/or trucut biopsy (TCB) in patients with rectal and perirectal lesions. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic utility of EUS-FNA and/or TCB in patients with rectal and perirectal lesions. We also assessed their influence on the management and clinical course of these patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We performed EUS-FNA and/or TCB in 11 consecutive patients (4 men and 7 women, 33-69 years) with rectal and perirectal lesions for whom conventional diagnostic tools could not provide definitive diagnoses. Patients with definite intraluminal cancer were excluded.

RESULTS

The 11 patients underwent 12 procedures, with 9 being EUS-FNA alone and 3 being EUS-FNA and TCB. Seven patients had rectal lesions and four had perirectal lesions. Initial EUS-FNA and/or TCB established a diagnosis of malignancy in five patients and of benign lesions in four. EUS-FNA plus TCB confirmed malignant lymphoma after diagnostic failure of initial EUS-FNA in one patient. In one other patient with suspicious secondary linitis plastica, EUS-FNA could not establish a definitive diagnosis. Correct diagnoses were obtained in 10 out of 11 patients who underwent EUS-FNA and/or TCB. EUS-FNA and/or TCB changed clinical courses, which included avoidance of unnecessary surgeries, having a chance of anal sphincter-saving surgeries, and timely administration of chemotherapy. No serious complications related to the use of EUS-FNA or TCB were evident.

CONCLUSION

EUS-FNA and/or TCB are useful in the diagnostic evaluation of and appropriate therapeutic plan in patients with rectal and perirectal lesions.

EUS-FNA mutational analysis in differentiating autoimmune pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) may mimic pancreatic cancer (PC). The detection of DNA mutations in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) material may improve discrimination between AIP and PC and is the context for this study.

METHODS

In a retrospective study, archived EUS-FNA material from patients with AIP and PC at two centers was analyzed for KRAS mutations and loss-of-heterozygosity analysis involving 18 microsatellite markers. KRAS status and the fractional allelic loss (number of affected microsatellites divided by informative ones) were compared for AIP and PC.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients with 33 samples were studied. There were 16 patients with AIP (17 samples) and 16 patients with PC. DNA amplification failed in 7 samples. Of 25 patients (26 samples), 14 had AIP (7 male, age 57 ± 17 years; mean ± SD) and 11 had PC (7 male, age 65 ± 14 years; mean ± SD). Cytology results for AIP were inflammatory = 3, inconclusive = 10, suspicious for malignancy = 2 and for PC were malignant = 5, suspicious for malignancy = 4 and inconclusive = 2, respectively. KRAS mutation was detected in none of the AIP cases and 10/11 PC cases (91%, Pearson χ(2) = 22.16, p < 0.001) or 10/16 PC cases (63%) accounting for PC cases with failed DNA amplification. Mean (±SD) fractional allelic loss for the AIP cases (0.16 ± 0.15) was not significantly different from the PC cases (0.26 ± 0.19).

CONCLUSIONS

A KRAS mutation in EUS/FNA material from a pancreatic mass is associated with malignancy and may help discriminate from benign conditions such as AIP.

Fluorescence in situ hybridization and K-ras analyses improve diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic masses

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is the main diagnostic modality for pancreatic mass lesions. However, cytology is often indeterminate, leading to repeat FNAs and delay in care. Here, we evaluate whether combining routine cytology with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and K-ras/p53 analyses improves diagnostic yield of pancreatic EUS-FNA.

METHODS

Fifty EUS-FNAs of pancreatic masses in 46 patients were retrospectively analyzed. Mean follow-up was 68 months. Thirteen initial cytologic samples (26%) were benign, 23 malignant (46%), and 14 atypical (28%). We performed FISH for p16, p53, LPL, c-Myc, MALT1, topoisomerase 2/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, and EGFR, as well as K-ras/p53 mutational analyses.

RESULTS

On final diagnosis, 11 (79%) of atypical FNAs were malignant, and 3 benign (21%). Fluorescence in situ hybridization was negative in all benign and all atypical samples with final benign diagnosis. Fluorescence in situ hybridization plus K-ras analysis correctly identified 60% of atypical FNAs with final malignant diagnosis. Combination of routine cytology with positive FISH and K-ras analyses yielded 87.9% sensitivity, 93.8% specificity, 96.7% positive predictive value, 78.9% negative predictive value, and 89.8% accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

Combining routine cytology with FISH and K-ras analyses improves diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic masses. We propose to include these ancillary tests in the workup of atypical cytology from pancreatic EUS-FNA.

EUS-FNA with rescue fluorescence in situ hybridization for the diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma in patients with inconclusive on-site cytopathology results

BACKGROUND

Detection of chromosomal abnormalities by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analysis has not been well-studied in FNA samples of pancreatic masses. Selective use of FISH in patients with inconclusive on-site cytopathology results may improve the sensitivity of EUS for malignancy.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the sensitivity and specificity of FISH analysis in patients with inconclusive on-site cytopathology results.

DESIGN

Consecutive patients with suspected pancreatic malignancy, nonrandomized cohort study. Final diagnosis was based on either surgical biopsy or disease progression on extended follow-up or death.

SETTING

Academic center, tertiary-care referral cancer center.

PATIENTS

A total of 212 EUS examinations were performed in 206 patients for solid pancreatic lesions over a 24-month period (January 2009-December 2010). FISH analysis was done for 69 patients with inconclusive or nonavailable on-site cytology results.

INTERVENTION

EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) of solid pancreatic masses with cytology and FISH analysis for polysomy of chromosomes 3, 7, and 17 and deletion of 9p21.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Sensitivity/specificity of cytology, FISH, and a composite of cytology and FISH.

RESULTS

Patients with positive on-site cytology (110), neuroendocrine tumors (22), insufficient follow-up (1), FISH not obtained (3), and renal cancer with pancreatic metastasis (1) were excluded. Sixty-nine patients comprised the study cohort, 54 with malignancy and 15 with benign disease. Sensitivity for malignancy of cytology, FISH analysis, and the combination were 61%, 74%, and 85%, respectively (P = .009). FISH detected an additional 13 cases of pancreatic adenocarcinoma missed by cytology. There was no false-positive FISH analysis in 15 patients with benign disease. No major complications occurred from EUS-FNA.

LIMITATIONS

Single center, selected patients underwent FISH analysis, limited number of patients with benign disease.

CONCLUSION

In patients with suspected pancreatic cancer, FISH analysis can detect additional cases missed by cytology without compromising specificity. FISH analysis to detect polysomy of chromosomes 3, 7, and 17 and deletion of 9p21 should be considered when cytology is negative for malignancy in patients with a known pancreatic mass.

Differentiation of pancreatic cysts with optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging: an ex vivo pilot study

We demonstrate for the first time that optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging can reliably distinguish between morphologic features of low risk pancreatic cysts (i.e., pseudocysts and serous cystadenomas) and high risk pancreatic cysts (i.e., mucinous cystic neoplasms and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms). In our study fresh pancreatectomy specimens (66) from patients with cystic lesions undergoing surgery were acquired and examined with OCT. A training set of 20 pathology-OCT correlated tissue specimens were used to develop criteria for differentiating between low and high risk cystic lesions. A separate (validation) set of 46 specimens were used to test the OCT criteria by three clinicians, blinded to histopathology findings. Histology was finally used as a 'gold' standard for testing OCT findings. OCT was able to reveal specific morphologic features of pancreatic cysts and thus to differentiate between low-risk and high-risk cysts with over 95% sensitivity and specificity. This pilot study suggests that OCT could be used by clinicians in the future to more reliably differentiate between benign and potentially malignant pancreatic cysts. However, in vivo use of OCT requires a probe that has to fit the bore of the pancreas biopsy needle. Therefore, we have developed such probes and planned to start an in vivo pilot study within the very near future.

RAD51 as a potential biomarker and therapeutic target for pancreatic cancer

Chemotherapy is a very important therapeutic strategy for cancer treatment. The failure of conventional and molecularly targeted chemotherapeutic regimes for the treatment of pancreatic cancer highlights a desperate need for novel therapeutic interventions. Chemotherapy often fails to eliminate all tumor cells because of intrinsic or acquired drug resistance, which is the most common cause of tumor recurrence. Overexpression of RAD51 protein, a key player in DNA repair/recombination has been observed in many cancer cells and its hyperexpression is implicated in drug resistance. Recent studies suggest that RAD51 overexpression contributes to the development, progression and drug resistance of pancreatic cancer cells. Here we provide a brief overview of the available pieces of evidence in support of the role of RAD51 in pancreatic tumorigenesis and drug resistance, and hypothesize that RAD51 could serve as a potential biomarker for diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. We discuss the possible involvement of RAD51 in the drug resistance associated with epithelial to mesenchymal transition and with cancer stem cells. Finally, we speculate that targeting RAD51 in pancreatic cancer cells may be a novel approach for the treatment of pancreatic cancer.

Effect of dedicated and supervised training on achieving competence in EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic lesions

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has been suggested as a benchmark of quality performance in EUS. However, there is paucity of data on the training requirement for competency in EUS-FNA of the pancreas. KO commenced the service without prior formal training in EUS-FNA. A formally trained colleague (MN) who underwent a fellowship in the same unit was appointed to a substantive post in 2007. The aims of the study were to assess if a dedicated training program in pancreaticobiliary (PB) EUS-FNA of solid lesions: (1) produced better results at the outset of independent practice than produced at the initiation of service without formal training and (2) produced results comparable with those of an experienced endosonographer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a retrospective review comparing the first 80 consecutive cases at the onset of practice of operator KO1 (2003/2004) and MN (2007/2008) as well as consecutive cases of operator KO2 (2007/2008) in the same time frame as the initial cases of operator MN.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference in EUS-FNA sensitivity for pancreatic malignancy between operator KO1 (56%) and operator MN (77%) p < 0.05. There was no significant difference in test performance between operator KO2 (82%) and MN (77%) (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our data show that formal training in PB EUS produces test performance at the outset of independent practice that is comparable with an experienced endosonographer, in line with the published standards for EUS-FNA of the pancreas and significantly better than that achieved without training.

Biomarkers of pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer has a high mortality rate since early diagnosis is difficult and radical operation is challenging. Classical tumor markers are reliable parameters to determine disease progression during chemotherapy or recurrence after surgery, but they are not adequate to identify suspected disease or for screening. Endoscopic brushing cytology or biopsy from the stenotic duct is widely performed for the histological evidence of pancreatic cancer, but still suffers from low sensitivity. Recently, several molecules were found to be specifically expressed in pancreatic cancer, and these novel molecular markers are reported to improve the sensitivity of cytology or biopsy. In some cases, novel markers are tested for the diagnosis of cystic neoplasms. In addition, advances in endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy enabled sampling of the cancer tissue before surgery or treatment, which delineates the individualized therapeutic strategy against pancreatic cancer, via the assessment of prognosis- or therapy resistance-related factors. Furthermore, novel transcriptomic or metabolomic biomarkers in the clinical samples collected by non-invasive methods, e.g. blood or saliva samples, are now applied for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. These methods will be beneficial for the screening and early detection of pancreatic cancer.

PAX8 is expressed in pancreatic well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors and in extrapancreatic poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas in fine-needle aspiration biopsy specimens

BACKGROUND

PAX (paired box) genes encode a family of transcription factors important for organogenesis. Recently, PAX8 has been recognized as a potential immunohistochemical marker of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. The authors evaluated PAX8 expression in fine-needle aspiration biopsies of neuroendocrine tumors to establish whether PAX8 immunohistochemistry can be used as an ancillary marker of pancreatic origin for neuroendocrine tumors.

METHODS

Fine-needle aspiration biopsies from 72 neuroendocrine tumors were evaluated for PAX8 expression: 32 primary and 23 metastatic well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors (25 pancreatic, 13 pulmonary, 3 ileal, 2 duodenal, 1 rectal, 1 ovarian, and 10 primary site unknown) and 17 poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas (11 pulmonary, 1 pancreas, 1 breast, 1 thymus, and 3 primary site unknown).

RESULTS

Among well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors, only tumors from the pancreas were PAX8 positive (14 of 25, 56%) whereas no cases of pulmonary (0 of 13), ileal (0 of 3), duodenal (0 of 2), rectal (0 of 1), or ovarian (0 of 1) well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors were positive for PAX8. One of 10 (10%) well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors of unknown primary origin was PAX8 positive. Among poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas, PAX8 expression was identified in 1 of 1 (100%) pancreatic, 1 of 1 (100%) thymic, 4 of 11 (36%) pulmonary, and 0 of 1 (0%) breast carcinomas. One of 3 (33%) poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas of unknown primary origin was PAX8 positive.

CONCLUSIONS

Pancreatic well-differentiated neuroendocrine tumors frequently express PAX8, which can help distinguish pancreatic primary tumors from tumors of other anatomic sites. In contrast, PAX8 expression in poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas is not specific for pancreatic origin and can be seen in extrapancreatic poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas.

Recurrent acute pancreatitis and persistent hyperamylasemia as a presentation of pancreatic osteoclastic giant cell tumor: an unusual presentation of a rare tumor

Giant cell tumors of the pancreas are rare neoplasms divided into three forms: osteoclastic, pleomorphic, and mixed. We report an unusual case of a 62-year-old male presenting with recurrent acute pancreatitis and found to have a mass in the head of the pancreas on routine imaging. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography showed a main pancreatic duct stricture, with brush cytology revealing the diagnosis of osteoclastic giant cell tumor of the pancreas. Whipple's procedure was successfully performed for resection of this tumor. and IAP.

Relapsed acute pancreatitis as the initial presentation of pancreatic cancer in a young man: a case report

In this report, we describe a 31-year-old man in whom acute pancreatitis was the initial feature of a subsequently diagnosed pancreatic adenocarcinoma with multiple metastases. He initially presented at our hospital with acute pancreatitis. Abdominal ultrasonography revealed a mildly dilated pancreatic duct and an enlarged pancreatic head. Although a follow-up abdominal ultrasonography revealed a progressively dilated pancreatic duct and a progressively enlarged pancreatic head, he refused further investigation and was lost to follow-up. Four months later, he returned to our hospital with relapsed acute pancreatitis. Obstructive jaundice was noted and drainage was performed. Because choledochoplasty with multiple balloon catheters was not fully effective, biliary tract bypass surgery was carried out. Intraoperative biopsy confirmed pancreatic adenocarcinoma with multiple metastases. The patient died of massive gastrointestinal bleeding a few weeks later. To our knowledge, this is the youngest case of pancreatic cancer with the uncommon initial presentation of acute pancreatitis reported in the literature. For a patient with acute pancreatitis, particularly recurrent episodes, but with no known risk factors for pancreatitis, a pancreatic neoplasm should be considered as a potential underlying cause, even in a young man.

Combined contrast-enhanced power Doppler and real-time sonoelastography performed during EUS, used in the differential diagnosis of focal pancreatic masses (with videos)

BACKGROUND

Contrast-enhanced power Doppler (CEPD) and real-time sonoelastography (RTSE) performed during EUS were previously described to be useful for the differential diagnosis between chronic pseudotumoral pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To prospectively assess the accuracy of the combination of CEPD and RTSE to differentiate pancreatic focal masses.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional feasibility study.

SETTING

A tertiary-care academic referral center.

PATIENTS

The study group included 54 patients with chronic pancreatitis (n = 21) and pancreatic adenocarcinoma (n = 33).

INTERVENTIONS

Both imaging methods (CEPD and RTSE) were performed sequentially during the same EUS examination. Power Doppler mode examination was performed after intravenous injection of a second-generation contrast agent (2.4 mL of SonoVue), and the data were digitally recorded, comprising both the early arterial phase and venous/late phase. Three 10-second sonoelastographic videos were also digitally recorded that included the focal mass and the surrounding pancreatic parenchyma. Postprocessing analyses based on specially designed software were used to analyze the CEPD and RTSE videos. A power Doppler vascularity index was used to characterize CEPD videos, the values being averaged during a 10-second video in the venous phase. Hue histogram analysis was used to characterize RTSE videos, with the mean hue histogram values being also averaged during a 10-second video.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

To differentiate chronic pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer.

RESULTS

The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of combined information provided by CEPD and RTSE to differentiate hypovascular hard masses suggestive of pancreatic carcinoma were 75.8%, 95.2%, and 83.3%, respectively, with a positive predictive value and negative predictive value of 96.2% and 71.4%, respectively.

LIMITATION

A single-center, average size of study population.

CONCLUSIONS

A combination of CEPD and RTSE performed during EUS seems to be a promising method that allows characterization and differentiation of focal pancreatic masses.

Quantitative endoscopic ultrasound elastography: an accurate method for the differentiation of solid pancreatic masses

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Qualitative endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) elastography is an accurate but subjective tool for the differential diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses. Second-generation EUS elastography allows quantitative analysis of tissue stiffness. We evaluated the accuracy of quantitative, second-generation EUS elastography in the differential diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses.

METHODS

The study included 86 consecutive patients who underwent EUS for the evaluation of solid pancreatic masses. EUS elastography was performed with the linear Pentax EUS and the Hitachi EUB900. Representative areas from the mass (A) and soft reference areas (B) were analyzed. The result of the elastographic evaluation was defined by the quotient B/A (strain ratio). Final diagnosis was based on histology of surgical specimens and cytology of EUS-fine-needle aspiration samples. The diagnostic accuracy of EUS elastography in detecting malignancy was calculated using receiver operating curve analysis.

RESULTS

The mean size of the pancreatic masses was 31.4 ± 12.3 mm. The final diagnoses were pancreatic adenocarcinoma (n = 49), inflammatory mass (n = 27), malignant neuroendocrine tumor (n = 6), metastatic oat-cell lung cancer (n = 2), pancreatic lymphoma (n = 1), and pancreatic solid pseudopapillary tumor (n = 1). The strain ratio was significantly higher among patients with pancreatic malignant tumors compared with those with inflammatory masses. The sensitivity and specificity of strain ratio for detecting pancreatic malignancies were 100% and 92.9%, respectively (area under the receiver operating curve, 0.983).

CONCLUSIONS

Quantitative, second-generation EUS elastography is useful for differential diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses. It allows for a quantitative and objective evaluation of tissue stiffness, which indicates the malignant or benign nature of the pancreatic lesion.