Indications, results, and clinical impact of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling in gastroenterology: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline - Updated January 2017

Endoscopic ultrasound assessment and tissue acquisition of mediastinal and abdominal lymph nodes

The differential diagnosis between benign and malignant lymph nodes (LNs) has a fundamental role in the characterization and staging of malignant conditions, as well as in subsequent patients’ management. All imaging modalities (i.e. computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging) rely mainly on size; endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) criteria based on B-mode evaluation and Doppler features fail to adequately characterize with high specificity LNs nature. The introduction of EUS-elastography and contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS are useful techniques to increase the diagnostic yield in identifying metastatic LNs, to identify which suspicious LN should require pathological characterization and, finally, to target tissue acquisition. EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) is increasingly being used for diagnosing lymphadenopathy whenever the characterization modifies patients’ subsequent management and when no superficial LN is accessible. Since target therapy are currently available (i.e. lung cancer, breast cancer), EUS-TA of malignant LNs could be required to identify tumor biology. In this field, both fine needle aspiration and biopsy needles are able to guarantee accurate results with almost perfect specificity and sub-optimal sensitivity. We finally propose a diagnostic algorithm based on most recent, high-level evidence for the diagnostic approach to suspected LNs assessment.

Curriculum for ERCP and endoscopic ultrasound training in Europe: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement

The European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) has recognized the need to formalize and enhance training in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). This manuscript represents the outcome of a formal Delphi process resulting in an official Position Statement of the ESGE and provides a framework to develop and maintain skills in ERCP and EUS. This curriculum is set out in terms of the prerequisites prior to training; recommended steps of training to a defined syllabus; the quality of training; and how competence should be defined and evidenced before independent practice. 1: Trainees should be competent in gastroscopy prior to commencing training. Formal training courses and the use of simulation in training are recommended. 2: Trainees should keep a contemporaneous logbook of their procedures, including key performance indicators and the degree of independence. Structured formative assessment is encouraged to enhance feedback. There should be a summative assessment process prior to commencing independent practice to ensure there is robust evidence of competence. This evidence should include a review of a trainee's procedure volume and current performance measures. A period of mentoring is strongly recommended in the early stages of independent practice. 3: Specifically for ERCP, all trainees should be competent up to Schutz level 2 complexity (management of distal biliary strictures and stones > 10 mm), with advanced ERCP requiring a further period of training. Prior to independent practice, ESGE recommends that a trainee can evidence a procedure volume of > 300 cases, a native papilla cannulation rate of ≥ 80 % (90 % after a period of mentored independent practice), complete stones clearance of ≥ 85 %, and successful stenting of distal biliary strictures of ≥ 90 % (90 % and 95 % respectively after a mentored period of independent practice). 4: The progression of EUS training and competence attainment should start from diagnostic EUS and then proceed to basic therapeutic EUS, and finally to advanced therapeutic EUS. Before independent practice, ESGE recommends that a trainee can evidence a procedure volume of > 250 cases (75 fine-needle aspirations/biopsies [FNA/FNBs]), satisfactory visualization of key anatomical landmarks in ≥ 90 % of cases, and an FNA/FNB accuracy rate of ≥ 85 %. ESGE recognizes the often inadequate quality of the evidence and the need for further studies pertaining to training in advanced endoscopy, particularly in relation to therapeutic EUS.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy in patients with unexplained diffuse gastrointestinal wall thickening

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) is recommended after non-diagnostic biopsy in gastrointestinal wall thickening, although the performance of currently available FNB needles in this setting is unknown. We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy and safety of EUS-FNB and to evaluate the "T" wall staging in malignant pathology. Patients and methods  This was a single center retrospective study that included all consecutive patients undergoing EUS-FNB for diffuse gastrointestinal wall thickening with at least one previous negative conventional endoscopic biopsy between January 2016 and November 2019. EUS-FNB was performed using linear-array echoendoscopes with slow-pull/fanning technique. Tissue acquisition was done with 19- or 22-gauge biopsy needles. Samples were included in formalin without rapid on-site evaluation and submitted for histopathological processing. The final diagnosis was based on conclusive histology or absence of evidence of disease progression after follow-up at least 6 months. Results  Twenty-nine patients (21 men), with a median age of 68 (IQR: 56-77), were included. EUS-FNB was technically feasible and the sample quality was adequate for full histological assessment in all patients (100 %). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and overall accuracy for diagnosis of malignancy were 95.5 %, 100 %, 100 %, 83.3 %, and 96.3 %, respectively. In patients with malignant disease, the samples obtained allowed detection of signs of deep layer infiltration ("histological staging") in 17 of 21 cases (81 %). No adverse events were noted. Conclusions  The EUS-FNB technique demonstrated excellent diagnostic performance and safety in the study of unexplained diffuse gastrointestinal wall thickening. Histological staging was obtained in a high percentage of samples.

Analysis of the Curative Effect of Neoadjuvant Therapy on Pancreatic Cancer

The prevalence of pancreatic cancer is sharply increasing recently, which significantly increases the economic burden of the population. At present, the primary treatment of resectable pancreatic cancer is surgical resection, followed by chemotherapy with or without radiation. However, the recurrence rates remain high even after R0 resection. This treatment strategy does not distinguish undetected metastatic disease, and it is prone to postoperative complications. Neoadjuvant therapies, including neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy, is being increasingly utilized in borderline resectable as well as resectable pancreatic cancer. This review summarized and discussed clinical trials of neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer, comparing resection rates, outcome measures, and adverse reactions between neoadjuvant chemotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

Comparing accuracy of high-risk features for detecting advanced neoplasia in pancreatic cystic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The American Gastroenterological Association recommends endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for evaluating pancreatic cystic lesions (PCL) with ≥2 high-risk features (HRF), whereas the American College of Gastroenterology recommends EUS for ≥1 HRF. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the diagnostic accuracy of using ≥1 vs. ≥2 HRF for assessing the risk of advanced neoplasia (AN) and performing EUS in PCL.

Methods

An electronic database search was performed for eligible studies. AN was defined as pancreatic adenocarcinoma, intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm or mucinous cystadenoma with high-grade dysplasia, pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. HRF included cyst size ≥3 cm, solid component, and dilated pancreatic duct ≥5 mm. The primary outcome was the sensitivity and specificity of using ≥1 vs. ≥2 HRF as an indication for EUS to detect AN in PCL.

Results

Of 38 studies initially screened, 8 were included in the final analysis. Seven studies assessed the accuracy of ≥2 HRF and 4 studies assessed ≥1 HRF. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of EUS for detecting AN were 41.7% (95% confidence interval 19.5-67.8%), 90.8% (81.9-95.5%), 30.4% (19.4-44.2%) and 94.3% (89.6-97.0%) with ≥2HRFs, and 77.1% (66.1-85.3%), 72.7% (50.4-87.5%), 17.95% (10.3-29.4%), 98.1% (90.8-99.6%), respectively, with ≥1 HRF.

Conclusion

Performing EUS for PCL with ≥1 HRF could offer greater sensitivity in detecting AN compared to ≥2 HRF, with a similar negative predictive value.

Optimal number of needle punctures in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy for gastric subepithelial lesions without rapid on-site evaluation

PURPOSE

The utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) for gastric subepithelial lesions (SELs) has been reported. In this study, we examined the optimal number of needle punctures during EUS-FNB for gastric SELs without rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE). The factors that allowed for a single needle puncture to arrive at the correct diagnosis were also analyzed.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of all patients who underwent EUS-FNB to evaluate gastric SELs between April 2015 and September 2020; 51 patients with 57 gastric SELs were enrolled. The optimal number of needle punctures was determined when additional needle passes did not increase diagnostic sensitivity by more than 10%. Factors allowing for only a single needle puncture to arrive at the correct diagnosis were identified by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

EUS-FNB resulted in a definitive final diagnosis in 48 of 57 lesions (84%). Lesions in the gastric body (odds ratio [OR] 6.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.75-21.6; P < 0.01) and lesions punctured using a 22G Franseen needle (OR 3.61, 95% CI 1.07-12.3; P = 0.04) were independent factors that allowed for only a single needle puncture to arrive at the correct diagnosis. The optimal number of needle punctures for lesions using a 22G Franseen needle in the gastric body and other lesions was two and three, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The optimal number of needle punctures in EUS-FNB for gastric SELs without ROSE was two or three, depending on the location and type of needle used.

[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.

Role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in the diagnosis and classification of lymphomas

BACKGROUND

endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is a safe and effective technique in the diagnosis of mediastinal and abdominal masses. However, the usefulness of EUS-FNA in the diagnosis and classification of lymphomas is controversial. The aim of this study was to determine the yield of EUS-FNA in the diagnosis and classification of lymphomas.

METHODS

a retrospective case series was performed in a tertiary referral center. All consecutive patients referred for EUS-FNA with a suspected diagnosis of lymphoma from March 2013 to June 2019 were included.

RESULTS

thirty-five patients (54.3 % women, median age 72 years) were included. The most frequent location of the node was the abdomen (67.9 %). Nodes were punctured using a 22-gauge (85.7 %) and 19-gauge needle (14.3 %) with a slow-pull technique. The number of passes performed were three or more in 82.9 % of patients. The samples were processed by the cellblock method. Adequate samples for immunohistochemical and molecular biological study were obtained in 33 (94.3 %) patients. EUS-FNA correctly diagnosed lymphoma in 30 out of 35 patients (85.7 %), and subclassification was determined in 23 patients (65.7 %). The most frequent diagnosis was non-Hodgkin lymphoma (85.7 %). There was one moderate adverse event (bleeding), which was resolved during the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-FNA may be a valuable technique in the evaluation of suspected lymphomas with an adequate diagnostic yield and a very low rate of adverse events.

Performance of a new flexible 19 G EUS needle in pancreatic solid lesions located in the head and uncinate process: A prospective multicenter study

Background and study aims  The poor flexibility of large-bore EUS needles often leads to technical failure when sampling from the duodenum. The aim of this study was to evaluate the technical and diagnostic performances of a new Menghini tip 19G nitinol EUS needle for sampling pancreatic solid lesions in the head and uncinate process. Patients and methods  This was a European prospective multicenter single-arm study. A maximum of four passes were allowed. In case of failure, different needles were permitted. Results  We included 75 patients (51 % males) with lesions in the head (n = 68; 91 %) and uncinate process (n = 7; 9 %) (mean size: 33 ± 12 mm; number of passes: 1.8 ± 0.9). Technical success was seen in 71 of 75 (94.7 %). Diagnostic rates were 89.3 % (67/75) and 94.4 % (67/71) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) analysis, respectively. In the eight cases with failure, diagnosis was obtained with another needle (n = 4), from another lesion (n = 3) or with follow-up (n = 1). A histological sample was obtained in 64 patients (ITT 85.3 % and PP 90 %) and immunohistochemistry was successfully performed in 13 of 15 lesions in which it was required. No differences between rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) and non-ROSE groups were observed regarding diagnostic success (87.5 % vs 91 %, P  = 0.582) and diagnosis at the first pass (70 % vs 81 %, P  = 0.289). Number of passes was lower in the ROSE group (1.4 + 0.9 vs 2.2 + 0.7, P  < 0.001). One adverse event was recorded (1.3 %) consisting in a duodenal perforation after a single session EUS-ERCP. Conclusions  The new nitinol Menghini tip 19G EUS needle showed high technical diagnostic success in safely sampling solid lesions in the head and uncinate process of the pancreas.

Tunneled biopsy is an underutilised, simple, safe and efficient method for tissue acquisition from subepithelial tumours

BACKGROUND

Tissue acquisition from subepithelial lesions is often attempted by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-sampling as conventional endoscopic biopsy usually fails to reach deeper layers of the gastrointestinal wall.

AIM

To investigate the utilisation, safety and diagnostic yield of an intensified “bite-on-bite” tunnel biopsy technique.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, all patients presenting with subepithelial masses in the upper gastrointestinal tract from March 2013 to July 2019 were included. Data were analysed for size and location of the subepithelial mass, use of intensified tunnel biopsy protocol (more than 10 double bite-on-bite biopsies) or superficial conventional biopsies, histology and imaging results, occurrence of readmission and adverse events after endoscopy.

RESULTS

Two hundred and twenty-nine patients with subepithelial lesions were included. Superficial conventional biopsies were taken in 117 patients and were diagnostic only in one lipoma (0.9 %). Tunnel biopsies taken in 112/229 (48.9%) patients were significantly more likely to provide histological diagnosis (53.6%; P < 0.001). For lesions ≥ 10mm the diagnostic yield of tunnel biopsies further increased to 41/67 (61.2%). No immediate or delayed complications were reported. Only 8 of the 51 endoscopists (15.7%) regularly attempted tunnel biopsies.

CONCLUSION

Tunnel biopsy is a simple, safe and efficient but underutilised diagnostic modality for tissue acquisition in subepithelial masses. It should be routinely attempted at the initial endoscopy.

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.

Rapid On-Site Evaluation by Endosonographer of Endoscopic Ultrasound Fine-Needle Aspiration of Solid Pancreatic Lesions: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) by cytopathologists during endoscopic ultrasound-fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs) improves adequacy and diagnostic accuracy while reducing the number of needle passes. We evaluated the usefulness of ROSE performed by the endosonographer.

METHODS

Patients with an SPL were randomly assigned to EUS-FNA with ROSE or non-ROSE. Procedure duration, number of needle passes, specimen adequacy, and adverse event rates were compared.

RESULTS

Sixty-five patients were enrolled (33 in the ROSE vs 32 in the non-ROSE group). Both groups were similar in terms of age, sex, size, and location of the lesion. Specimen adequacy rates were high and similar between groups. Mean (standard deviation) procedure duration was shorter in the ROSE versus non-ROSE group (30.0 [11.3] vs 37.0 [7.2] minutes, P < 0.005), as well as the mean (standard deviation) number of needle passes (2.6 [0.8] vs 3.5 [0.8], P < 0.005). Accuracy parameters as sensitivity and accuracy of ROSE by the endosonographer for malignancy were 93% and 88%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

After specific training, the endosonographer can accurately evaluate samples during EUS-FNA of SPL, allowing for a shorter procedure duration and a lower number of needle passes.

A Prognostic Score for Predicting Survival in Patients With Pancreatic Head Adenocarcinoma and Distal Cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND/AIM

Survival of patients with pancreatic cancer remains poor despite improvements in therapeutic strategies. This study aims to create a novel preoperative score to predict prognosis in patients with tumors of the pancreaticobiliary head.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data on 190 patients who underwent to pancreaticoduodenectomy at Sapienza University of Rome from January 2010 to December 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. After exclusion criteria, 101 patients were considered eligible for retrospective study. Preoperative biological, clinical and radiological parameters were considered.

RESULTS

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma [hazard ratio (HR)=1.995, 95% confidence intervaI (CI)=1.1-3.3; p=0.01], carbohydrate antigen 19.9 (CA 19.9) >230 U/ml (HR=2.414, 95% CI=2.4-1.5, p<0.0001) and Wirsung duct diameter >3 mm (HR=1.592, 95% CI=1.5-0.9; p=0.08) were the only parameters associated with poor prognosis. Through these parameters, a prognostic score (PHT score) was developed which predicted worst survival when exceeding 2 and better survival when ≤2.

CONCLUSION

The PHT score may have a potential impact on predicting overall survival and consequently modulate the timing and type of treatment (up-front surgery vs. neoadjuvant therapy) patients are offered.

GAPS-EUS: a new and reliable tool for the assessment of basic skills and performance in EUS among endosonography trainees

Objective

Endosonography (EUS) is a useful but complex diagnostic modality which requires advanced endoscopy training and guidance by a supervisor. Since learning curves vary among individuals, assessment of the actual competence among EUS trainees is important.

Design/methods

We designed a novel assessment tool entitled Global Assessment of Performance and Skills in EUS (GAPS-EUS) for assessing skills among EUS trainees. Five quality indicators were marked on a five-grade scale by the supervisor (Observer Score) and by the trainee (Trainee Score). Trainees were included in two high-volume centres (Gothenburg, Sweden, and Bologna, Italy). Outcomes were feasibility, patient safety, reliability, and validity of GAPS-EUS in trainee-performed EUS procedures.

Results

Twenty-two EUS-trainees were assessed in a total of 157 EUS procedures with a completion rate of 157/157 (100 %) and a patient adverse event rate of 2/157 (1.3 %; gastroenteritis n=1, fever n=1). GAPS-EUS showed a high measurement reliability (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient=0.87) and a high inter-rater reliability comparing the supervisor and the trainee (r=0.83, r²=0.69, p<0.001). The construct of GAPS-EUS was verified by comparing low-level and high-level performance procedures and the content validity by recording that the EUS-FNA manoeuvre resulted in a lower score than other aspects of EUS 3.07 (95% CI 2.91 to 3.23) vs 3.51 (95% CI 3.37 to 3.65) (p<0.001). External validity was confirmed via similar findings in both centres.

Conclusion

GAPS-EUS is an easy-to-use and reliable tool with a recorded high validity for the assessment of competence among trainees in EUS. It can be recommended to centres involved in the education of future endosonographers.

Trial registration number

NCT02455570.

Cystic pancreatic lesions, the endless dilemma

Cystic pancreatic lesions involve a wide variety of pathological entities that include neoplastic and non-neoplastic lesions. The proper diagnosis, differentiation, and staging of these cystic lesions are considered a crucial issue in planning further management. There are great challenges for their diagnostic models. In our time, new emerging methods for this diagnosis have been discovered. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology with chemical and molecular analysis of cyst fluid and EUS-guided fine needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy, through the needle microforceps biopsy, and single-operator cholangioscopy/pancreatoscopy are promising methods that have been used in the diagnosis of cystic pancreatic lesions. Hereby we discuss the diagnosis of cystic pancreatic lesions and the benefits of various diagnostic models.

Comparative diagnostic accuracy of EUS needles in solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue sampling is the standard of care for diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions. While many two-way comparisons between needle types have been made in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), it is unclear which size and type of needle offers the best probability of diagnosis. We therefore performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare different sized and shaped needles to rank the diagnostic performance of each needle. Methods  We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases through August, 2020 for RCTs that compared the diagnostic accuracy of EUS fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and biopsy (FNB) needles in solid pancreatic masses. Using a random-effects NMA under the frequentist framework, RCTs were analyzed to identify the best needle type and sampling technique. Performance scores (P-scores) were used to rank the different needles based on pooled diagnostic accuracy. The NMA model was used to calculate pairwise relative risk (RR) with 95 % confidence intervals. Results  Review of 2577 studies yielded 29 RCTs for quantitative synthesis, comparing 13 different needle types. All 22G FNB needles had an RR > 1 compared to the reference 22G FNA (Cook) needle. The highest P-scores were seen with the 22G Medtronic FNB needle (0.9279), followed by the 22G Olympus FNB needle (0.8962) and the 22G Boston Scientific FNB needle (0.8739). Diagnostic accuracy was not significantly different between needles with or without suction. Conclusions  In comparison to FNA needles, FNB needles offer the highest diagnostic performance in sampling pancreatic masses, particularly with 22G FNB needles.

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. (Gut Liver 2021;15:-374)

Intermittent endoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions. Pilot study

Background and purpose of the study: endoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is the method of choice for sampling pancreatic solid lesions. However, there is significant heterogeneity in terms of the technique used. Intermittent aspiration has not been evaluated in pancreatic solid lesions and could improve the diagnostic performance.

METHODS

Single-blind, non-inferiority pilot study. Patients with solid pancreatic lesions and indication for EUS-FNA were prospectively included. Patients were randomly assigned to intermittent (IS) or continuous (CS) suction techniques. Diagnostic performance, cellularity, blood contamination and number of passes required to reach diagnosis were evaluated.

MAIN RESULTS

33 patients were assigned to CS (16 patients) or IS (17 patients). Diagnostic performance was 87.5% for CS and 94.1% for IS (OR 2.29, 95%CI 0.19-27.99, p = 0.51). In the IS group samples had higher cellularity (OR 1.83, 95%CI 0.48-6.91, p = 0.37) and lower blood contamination (OR 0.38, 95%CI 0.09-1.54, p = 0.18). The number of passes required to reach diagnosis was 2.12 for CS and 1.94 for IS (p = 0.64). Liquid cytology was obtained in 73.3% of IS and 61.5% of CS (OR 1.72, 95%CI 0.35-8.50).

CONCLUSIONS

The IS technique was not inferior to CS in terms of diagnostic accuracy in the evaluation of pancreatic solid lesions, with a tendency to obtain higher cellularity, lower blood contamination and frequent presence of cell block.

Revising the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) research priorities: a research progress update

BACKGROUND

One of the aims of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) is to encourage high quality endoscopic research at a European level. In 2016, the ESGE research committee published a set of research priorities. As endoscopic research is flourishing, we aimed to review the literature and determine whether endoscopic research over the last 4 years had managed to address any of our previously published priorities.

METHODS

As the previously published priorities were grouped under seven different domains, a working party with at least two European experts was created for each domain to review all the priorities under that domain. A structured review form was developed to standardize the review process. The group conducted an extensive literature search relevant to each of the priorities and then graded the priorities into three categories: (1) no longer a priority (well-designed trial, incorporated in national/international guidelines or adopted in routine clinical practice); (2) remains a priority (i. e. the above criterion was not met); (3) redefine the existing priority (i. e. the priority was too vague with the research question not clearly defined).

RESULTS

The previous ESGE research priorities document published in 2016 had 26 research priorities under seven domains. Our review of these priorities has resulted in seven priorities being removed from the list, one priority being partially removed, another seven being redefined to make them more precise, with eleven priorities remaining unchanged. This is a reflection of a rapid surge in endoscopic research, resulting in 27 % of research questions having already been answered and another 27 % requiring redefinition.

CONCLUSIONS

Our extensive review process has led to the removal of seven research priorities from the previous (2016) list, leaving 19 research priorities that have been redefined to make them more precise and relevant for researchers and funding bodies to target.

Factors influencing diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in pancreatic and biliary tumors

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is influenced by several factors, primarily operator expertise. Formal training in EUS-FNA, as suggested by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines, is not always available and is often expensive and time-consuming. In this study we evaluate factors influencing the diagnostic accuracy of pancreatic EUS-FNA.

METHODS

In a retrospective study, 557 consecutive EUS-FNAs were evaluated. Several variables relating to the procedures were considered to calculate the EUS-FNA performance over eight years.

RESULTS

A total of 308 out of 557 EUS-FNAs were selected. Overall sensitivity of EUS-FNA was 66% (95% CI: 60.8-71.8), specificity 100%, and diagnostic accuracy 69% (95% CI: 64.0-74.4). An increase in diagnostic accuracy was observed to >90% using a new fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle and in the case of simultaneous sampling of primary and metastatic lesions. Diagnostic accuracy >80% was observed after 250 procedures, in the absence of rapid on-site cytopathological examination (ROSE). Multivariate logistic regression analysis confirmed that the FNB needle, operator skill, and double EUS-FNA sampling are associated with high diagnostic accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

The learning curve for EUS-FNA may be longer and a considerable number of procedures are needed to achieve high diagnostic accuracy in the absence of ROSE. However, the use of FNB needles and the simultaneous sampling of primary and metastatic lesions can rapidly improve the diagnostic accuracy of the procedure.

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 8 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.

High Sensitivity of EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB in Lymphadenopathy Caused by Metastatic Disease: A Prospective Comparative Study

Background/Aims

The diagnostic work-up of lymphadenopathy is challenging but important to determine the correct therapy. Nevertheless, few studies have addressed the topic of endosonography (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition in lymphadenopathy. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the accuracy and safety of EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling (EUS-FNB) in intrathoracic and intraabdominal lymphadenopathy.

Methods

In a tertiary care center, patients with lymphadenopathy referred for EUS-guided sampling were included prospectively from 2014 to 2019 (NCT02360839). In all cases, EUS-FNB (22 gauge) and EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) (25 gauge) were performed. The patients were randomized to the first needle pass with FNB or FNA. Study outcomes were the diagnostic accuracy and adverse event rate.

Results

Forty-eight patients were included (median age: 69 years [interquartile range, 59–76]; 24/48 females [50%]). The final diagnoses were metastasis (n=17), lymphoma (n=11), sarcoidosis (n=6), and inflammatory disease (n=14). The diagnostic performance of the two modalities was comparable, including a high sensitivity for metastatic nodes (EUS-FNB: 87% vs. EUS-FNA: 100%, p=0.5). The sensitivity for lymphoma was borderline superior in favor of EUS-FNB (EUS-FNB: 55% vs. EUS-FNA: 9%, p=0.06). No adverse events were recorded.

Conclusions

In lymphadenopathy, both EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA are safe and highly sensitive for metastatic lymph node detection. Lymphoma diagnosis is challenging regardless of the needle used.

Side-by-side comparison of next-generation sequencing, cytology, and histology in diagnosing locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided biopsy sampling is the method of choice for obtaining pancreatic tissue. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) has been applied to EUS-guided biopsy sampling and may classify patients based on specific molecular profiles. Our study aimed to compare side-by-side the diagnostic yield achievable by genetic identification of somatic mutations detected with NGS versus histologic and cytologic typing in locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma (LAPC) in samples acquired under EUS guidance.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective comparative pilot study at Humanitas Research Hospital. The study included 33 patients referred for LAPC who underwent EUS-guided tissue acquisition using a 22-gauge Franseen needle. Material was obtained for both pathologic diagnosis and DNA extraction and targeted NGS analysis with the AmpliSeq Comprehensive Panel v3 (Illumina Inc, San Diego, Calif, USA). Twenty-one genes were prioritized for somatic mutation detection.

RESULTS

The final diagnosis was pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in all patients (100%). A macroscopic core was obtained in 30 patients (91%). In 3 lesions no cores adequate for histologic analysis were obtained, but cytologic analysis revealed tumoral cells from PDAC. DNA was extracted from 32 of 33 samples (97%), most of which (27/32) carried at least 2 clearly pathogenic mutations in different genes. Detection of K-ras mutation allowed for molecular diagnosis of PDAC in most of the patients (30/32).

CONCLUSIONS

In our study we demonstrated that proper tissue specimens obtained under EUS guidance allowed DNA sample extraction and subsequent NGS analysis in 97% of cases. These results support the potential role of NGS as a complementary diagnostic test to be implemented in association with standard diagnostic modalities. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03578939.).

Performing EUS during COVID-19 postendemic period: A report from endoscopy center in Wuhan

In early April 2020, the 3-month-long city-wide lockdown was lifted in Wuhan, the epicenter of China during Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic. However, continuing precautions are still practiced considering the risk of transmission from asymptomatic carriers. Given that COVID-19 is spread via airborne droplets, including aspiration of oral and fecal material through endoscopes, our endoscopy center has strategically assigned health-care providers to ensure triage workflow and to minimize concomitant exposure from potential asymptomatic carriers. Here, we share the experience of performing EUS-FNA during the COVID-19 pandemic and postendemic periods. We illustrate our workflow using a patient with a left adrenal mass as an example and followed a biosafety level-2 standard. We believe all endoscopy centers need to focus on these three directions: (1) pre-EUS patients risk assessment and triage, (2) Personal protective equipment (PPE), and (3) dressing code modalities. We fully adopted them in our hospital to reduce COVID-19 resurgence risk.

Molecular analysis of pancreatic cystic neoplasm in routine clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Cystic pancreatic lesions consist of a wide variety of lesions that are becoming increasingly diagnosed with the growing use of imaging techniques. Of these, mucinous cysts are especially relevant due to their risk of malignancy. However, morphological findings are often suboptimal for their differentiation. Endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) with molecular analysis has been suggested to improve the diagnosis of pancreatic cysts.

AIM

To determine the impact of molecular analysis on the detection of mucinous cysts and malignancy.

METHODS

An 18-month prospective observational study of consecutive patients with pancreatic cystic lesions and an indication for EUS-FNA following European clinical practice guidelines was conducted. These cysts included those > 15 mm with unclear diagnosis, and a change in follow-up or with concerning features in which results might change clinical management. EUS-FNA with cytological, biochemical and glucose and molecular analyses with next-generation sequencing were performed in 36 pancreatic cysts. The cysts were classified as mucinous and non-mucinous by the combination of morphological, cytological and biochemical analyses when surgery was not performed. Malignancy was defined as cytology positive for malignancy, high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma on surgical specimen, clinical or morphological progression, metastasis or death related to neoplastic complications during the 6-mo follow-up period. Next-generation sequencing results were compared for cyst type and malignancy.

RESULTS

Of the 36 lesions included, 28 (82.4%) were classified as mucinous and 6 (17.6%) as non-mucinous. Furthermore, 5 (13.9%) lesions were classified as malignant. The amount of deoxyribonucleic acid obtained was sufficient for molecular analysis in 25 (69.4%) pancreatic cysts. The amount of intracystic deoxyribonucleic acid was not statistically related to the cyst fluid volume obtained from the lesions. Analysis of KRAS and/or GNAS showed 83.33% [95% confidence interval (CI): 63.34-100] sensitivity, 60% (95%CI: 7.06-100) specificity, 88.24% (95%CI: 69.98-100) positive predictive value and 50% (95%CI: 1.66-98.34) negative predictive value (P = 0.086) for the diagnosis of mucinous cystic lesions. Mutations in KRAS and GNAS were found in 2/5 (40%) of the lesions classified as non-mucinous, thus recategorizing those lesions as mucinous neoplasms, which would have led to a modification of the follow-up plan in 8% of the cysts in which molecular analysis was successfully performed. All 4 (100%) malignant cysts in which molecular analysis could be performed had mutations in KRAS and/or GNAS, although they were not related to malignancy (P > 0.05). None of the other mutations analyzed could detect mucinous or malignant cysts with statistical significance (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Molecular analysis can improve the classification of pancreatic cysts as mucinous or non-mucinous. Mutations were not able to detect malignant lesions.

Complete laparoscopic-transhiatal removal of duplex benign oesophageal tumour: case report and review of literature

BACKGROUND

Leiomyoma is the most common benign oesophageal tumour. Half of all leiomyoma patients have oesophagus-associated complaints, such as dysphagia and epigastric pain, and the other 50% are asymptomatic with a diagnosis made on incidental discovery. Endoscopic ultrasonography is essential for an accurate preoperative workup and can enable guided-tissue acquisition for immunohistochemistry in certain cases. Smaller tumours are amenable to traditional and novel endoscopic removal in specialized centres, but some complex cases require surgical enucleation with a minimally invasive approach.

CASE PRESENTATION

An asymptomatic 60-year-old woman was accidentally diagnosed with a bifocal oesophageal mass, which was discovered by chest computed tomography. We report a rare case of a duplicated lower-third oesophageal leiomyoma, which was completely removed via the laparoscopic transhiatal approach. The patient has recovered successfully from the surgery. She has been followed up for six months with a normal oesophagram, adequate oesophageal function and no complaints observed. Pathological examination confirmed the diagnosis of leiomyoma in both lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reported case of duplex oesophageal leiomyomas removed laparoscopically. Using the minimally invasive abdominal technique, the lower oesophagus can be mobilised to the mediastinum without pleura injury and offers a good alternative to the thoracoscopic approach in patients with possible intrathoracic difficulties. At experienced centres, laparoscopic transhiatal enucleation of lower oesophageal leiomyomas and other benign tumours with a combination of intraoperative oesophagoscopy is a safe, fast and effective operation.

Transabdominal ultrasound-guided pancreatic biopsy: a neglected but safe, effective and inexpensive procedure that needs to be re-juvinalized

BACKGROUND

For solid pancreatic masses, ultrasound endoscopic fine-needle biopsy is suggested as the front-line investigation for tissue achievement, notwithstanding the optimal performance of transabdominal ultrasound (TUS)-guided biopsy.

PURPOSE

To reassess the efficacy and effectiveness of TUS-guided sampling and to determine the factors predictive of accurate histology.

METHODS

In total, 142 patients with an indication for a TUS-guided biopsy of a pancreatic mass were analyzed. A single pass of an 18-gauge Biomol needle was carried out by the Menghini technique. The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the procedure in terms of correctly diagnosing an inflammatory or neoplastic lesion were determined. The patients' characteristics, the size and location of the mass, and the sonographers' experience in performing TUS were recorded.

RESULTS

The sampling was unsuccessful in 24 cases, owing to the deep localization of lesions (57%), bloating (33%), or low patient compliance (10%). The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the 118 successful biopsies were 81%, 79%, and 100%, respectively. A biopsy core was obtained in 90 of the 118 patients (76%) in whom the procedure was attempted. In the multivariate analysis, lesion size (≤ 20 mm vs. > 20 mm) (OR = 5.3 [1.7-17.0]) and operator experience (OR = 4.4 [1.6-12.1]) predicted the acquisition of adequate samples. With an expert sonographer, the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were 87%, 85%, and 100%, respectively. Two adverse events were registered: mild abdominal pain and a hypotensive crisis.

CONCLUSIONS

The present investigation highlights the optimal performance of a TUS-guided biopsy of a pancreatic mass. Because of its simplicity and safety, the procedure needs to be included among the recommended investigative options.

Focal Autoimmune Pancreatitis: A Simple Flow Chart for a Challenging Diagnosis

Autoimmune pancreatitis is a chronic fibroinflammatory autoimmune mediated disease of the pancreas. Clinically, obstructive painless jaundice and upper abdominal pain are the main symptoms. Focal AIP is characterized by segmental involvement of pancreatic parenchyma and it is often radiologically represented by a pancreatic mass. In these cases, the diagnosis can be very challenging, since it may be easily confused with pancreatic cancer. Therefore, we suggest a combined approach of imaging tests as the diagnostic workup. EUS study combined with CEUS and elastography, if available, increases the accuracy of the method to rule out cancer. Moreover, the lesion should always be sampled under EUS guidance to obtain a cyto/histological diagnosis. The diagnostic workup should also include the use of diagnostic clinical criteria (extrapancreatic lesions, steroid response) and laboratory findings (CA 19.9 and IgG4 evaluations).

Prospective study of EUS-guided tissue acquisition with a 20G core biopsy needle with a forward bevel for solid pancreatic mass

There is a growing need for tissue collection for immunostaining and genetic testing. Recently, several fine-needle biopsy needles are commercially available for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition.This prospective historical controlled study evaluates a 20G core biopsy needle with a forward bevel for solid pancreatic masses larger than 15 mm in diameter. The primary endpoint was the accuracy of histological diagnosis. The secondary endpoints included technical success rate, sample adequacy for histology, cytological diagnostic accuracy, and adverse events.Seventy consecutive patients were enrolled between January and October 2017. We achieved technical success in all cases regardless of the puncture sites or the endosonographer's experience. The final diagnoses were neoplasms in 67 patients (95.7%; pancreatic cancer in 65 patients, neuroendocrine neoplasm in 1, and malignant lymphoma in 1) and benign lesions in 3 patients (4.3%; autoimmune pancreatitis in 2 patients and mass-forming pancreatitis in 1). The obtained specimens were adequate for histological evaluation in all cases and the histological accuracy was 91.4% (95% confidence interval, 82.3-96.8%, P < .05) with the sensitivity and specificity of 91.0% and 100%, respectively. The cytological diagnostic accuracy was 95.7% and all patients were accurately diagnosed by combining cytological and histological examinations. As for adverse events, an asymptomatic needle fracture occurred in 1 case (1.4%).This 20G core biopsy needle with a forward bevel showed a high accuracy of histological diagnosis for solid pancreatic masses.

Practical approach to linear EUS examination of the liver

EUS has become a substantial diagnostic and therapeutic modality for digestive tract conditions. The extent of endosonographic assessment is wide, and, among others, it allows for the evaluation of liver anatomy and related pathologies. Moreover, EUS assessment has proved more accurate in detecting small focal liver lesions missed by standard imaging examinations such as computed tomography or magnetic resonance. Endosonographically, various liver segments can be visualized by transgastric and transduodenal scanning following anatomical landmarks, thus providing arranged systematic examination. In addition, knowledge considering the correct position during examination is crucial for EUS-guided procedures such as hepaticogastrostomy, ablation of tumors, and measurement of portal pressure gradient. The evolution of EUS-guided intervention has contributed to the increasing importance of understanding the hepatic segmental anatomy during the EUS examination.

Clinical Management of Bile Duct Diseases: Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in a Personalized Approach

Biliary diseases are common, but clinical symptoms are often unspecific and direct access and visualization of the biliopancreatic system for diagnostic purpose is difficult. In the last decades endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has become a primary method in the gastrointestinal tract. It significantly changed the role of endoscopy in diagnostic imaging in the gastrointestinal tract and adjacent organs. EUS has become an effective diagnostic tool in biliary stone disease as well as in the diagnosis of indeterminate biliary strictures. Furthermore, an EUS-directed transmural approach emerged as a safe and effective alternative to ERCP in patients requiring biliary drainage, in particular as a backup method if standard ERCP-approach fails. Development of new techniques, specific accessories and stents during the last decade led to an enormous step forward in terms of efficacy and safety of an EUS-directed approach. In the current article technical and clinical aspects of EUS-guided diagnostic and therapeutic approaches in different clinical indications will be discussed together with a review of the available data.

Contrast-enhanced harmonic versus standard endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in solid pancreatic lesions: a single-center prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasound (CH-EUS) can visualize necrotic areas and vessels inside lesions. CH-EUS findings combined with EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) improves diagnosis in pancreatic solid masses. CH-EUS can also guide EUS-FNA (CH-EUS-FNA), potentially improving the diagnostic rate of EUS-FNA, but such superiority has not been proved in prospective studies. We aimed to assess whether CH-EUS-FNA is superior to standard EUS-FNA for specific diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses and what factors affect the diagnostic rate.

METHODS

This randomized controlled study in one tertiary medical academic center included patients with suspected pancreatic solid masses on transabdominal ultrasound or computed tomography (CT) scan. Two passes with a 22-G standard FNA needle were done using EUS-FNA and CH-EUS-FNA in random order, and the visible core obtained was sent for histological analysis. Final diagnosis was based on EUS-FNA or surgical specimen results and on 12-month follow-up by imaging.

RESULTS

148 patients were evaluated. EUS-FNA and CH-EUS-FNA showed diagnostic sensitivities of 85.5 % and 87.6 %, respectively (not significantly different) and the combined sensitivity of the two passes was 93.8 %. The false-negative rate was not significantly different when hypoenhanced or hyperenhanced lesions were compared with the EUS-FNA results. No differences were seen for the results related to location, size, tumor stage, chronic pancreatitis features, or presence of biliary plastic stent.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnostic rates for samples obtained using 22-G needles with standard EUS-FNA and CH-EUS-FNA were not statistically significantly different.

A scoring model for radiologic diagnosis of gastric leiomyomas (GLMs) with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT): Differential diagnosis from gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs)

OBJECTIVES

To investigate CT findings and develop a diagnostic score model to differentiate GLMs from GISTs.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 109 patients with pathologically confirmed GLMs (n = 46) and GISTs (n = 63) from January 2013 to August 2018 who received CE-CT before surgery. Demographic and radiological features was collected, including lesion location, contour, presence or absence of intralesional necrosis and ulceration, growth pattern, whether the tumor involved EGJ, the long diameter (LD) /the short diameter (SD) ratio, pattern and degree of lesion enhancement. Univariate analyses and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify independent predictors and establish a predictive model. Independent predictors for GLMs were weighted with scores based on regression coefficients. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was created to determine the diagnostic ability of the model. Overall score distribution was divided into four groups to show differentiating probability of GLMs from GISTs.

RESULTS

Five CT features were the independent predictors for GLMs diagnosis in multivariate logistic regression analysis, including esophagogastric junction (EGJ) involvement (OR, 367.9; 95 % CI, 5.8-23302.8; P =  0.005), absence of necrosis (OR, 11.9; 95 % CI, 1.0-138. 1; P =  0.048) and ulceration (OR, 151.9; 95 % CI, 1.4-16899.6; P =  0.037), degree of enhancement (OR, 9.3; 95 % CI, 3.2-27.4; P <  0.001), and long diameter/ short diameter (LD/SD) ratio (OR,170.9; 95 % CI, 8.4-3493.4; P =  0.001). At a cutoff of 9 points, AUC for this score model was 0.95, with 95.65 % sensitivity, 79.37 % specificity, 77.19 % PPV, 96.15 % NPV and 86.24 % diagnostic accuracy. An increasing trend was showed in diagnostic probability of GLMs among four groups based on the score (P <  0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The newly designed scoring system is reliable and easy-to-use for GLMs diagnosis by distinguishing from GISTs, including EGJ involvement, absence of ulceration and necrosis, mild enhancement and high LD/SD ratio. The overall score of model ranged from 1 to 17 points, which was divided into 4 groups: 1-7 points, 7-10 points, 10-13 points and 13-17 points, with a diagnostic probability of GLMs 0%, 45 %, 83 % and 100 %, respectively.

Slow-pull technique yields better quality smears: prospective comparison of slow-pull and standard suction techniques of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic accuracy and quality of smears obtained by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) are influenced by characteristics of suction and examined organ.

AIMS AND METHODS

Efficiency of EUS-FNA and quality of smears obtained by slow-pull (SP) and standard suction (SS) techniques was prospectively compared in the sampling of pancreatic (N = 56) and extrapancreatic (N = 145) tumors.

RESULTS

SS technique resulted in a higher number of smear pairs both in pancreatic (1.74 vs. 3.19; p < 0.001) and extrapancreatic tumors (1.62 vs. 3.28; p < 0.001); however, it decreased the proportion of diagnostic smears (46.69% vs. 36.52%; p = 0.002 and 49.17% vs. 30.67%; p < 0.001) and increased the bloodiness (1.51 vs. 2.07; p < 0.001 and 1.48 vs. 2.05; p < 0.001). In pancreatic cancers, no difference was observed in terms of diagnostic accuracy (81.38% vs. 83.45%) and cellularity (1.44 vs. 1.27; p = 0.067); however, they were substantially higher in extrapancreatic tumors using SP technique (71.41% vs. 60.71% and 1.34 vs. 0.77; p < 0.001). Only SP technique resulted in a significant difference between examiners in terms of technical success rate and quality of smears without any decrease of diagnostic accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

SP technique yields better quality smears independently from tumors characteristics; however, it shows significant examiner-dependency. SS technique reduces the diagnostic accuracy of sampling in extrapancreatic tumors.

Endoscopic diagnosis and management of gastric subepithelial lesions

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this manuscript is to provide an in-depth review of gastric subepithelial lesions (SELs) and describe the current approach to endoscopic diagnosis and management of these lesions.

RECENT FINDINGS

Gastric SELs are a relatively frequent finding on routine endoscopy (incidence 0.2-3%). A systematic approach to diagnosis and management is key because many SELs are of little consequence, while others carry a high risk of malignant transformation. Because esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) cannot delineate depth of invasion or subepithelial appearance, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) should be considered a first-line modality. Recent data suggest EUS-guided fine needle biopsy (FNB) may be superior to traditional fine needle aspiration (FNA) for the diagnosis of gastric SELs due to its ability to obtain histologic specimens for immunohistochemical staining. Alternative techniques for tissue sampling (combined with simultaneous resection) include submucosal resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), submucosal tunnelling with endoscopic resection (STER) or endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR).

SUMMARY

This review details the endoscopic diagnosis and management of gastric SELs. Although EUS-guided sampling remains a first-line strategy (preferably with FNB), recent techniques including ESD, STER and EFTR have the potential to provide additional diagnostic and therapeutic options.

Evaluation of Upper Endoscopic and Endoscopic Ultrasound Features in the Differential Diagnosis of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors and Leiomyomas in the Upper Gastrointestinal Tract

Background

Differentiation between benign and malignant subepithelial lesions (SELs) in the upper gastrointestinal tract (UGT) leads to far-reaching clinical consequences. An accurate diagnosis can be challenging because of the insufficient diagnostic yield of upper endoscopy, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and different types of biopsy.

Aim

Our aim was to reveal the efficacy of upper endoscopic and EUS features for the differential diagnosis of hypoechogenic SELs (gastrointestinal stromal tumors [GISTs] and leiomyomas) in the UGT.

Materials and Methods

The research covers a case series study of 27 hypoechogenic SELs in the UGT between 2012 and 2015 at Vilnius University Hospital Santaros Klinikos. Upper endoscopic and EUS features of SELs were recorded. In order to standardize the diagnostic approach to GISTs and leiomyomas, we assigned scores for seven upper endoscopic and EUS features.

Results

The mean total scores in the GIST group were significantly higher than those in the leiomyoma group: 3.25 ± 1.71 and 0.53 ± 0.83 (p < 0.0001), respectively. Increment by one score increased the odds ratio for GIST 5.87 times (95% CI 1.63-21.11; p = 0.007). The total score demonstrated very good discriminatory features of GISTs against leiomyomas (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.94 [0.86-1]). The cutoff value of 1.5 total score indicated 83.3% sensitivity and 93.3% specificity in diagnosing GISTs.

Conclusions

Upper endoscopy and EUS are useful methods in making a definite diagnosis of SELs. Their diagnostic accuracy for the differential diagnosis of GISTs and leiomyomas is sufficient.

Diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition for small solid pancreatic lesions

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition is sometimes required to diagnose small solid pancreatic lesions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic yield of EUS-guided tissue acquisition for small solid pancreatic lesions and the differences in diagnostic yield among different needles. Patients and method  We retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients who had undergone EUS-guided tissue acquisition for solid pancreatic lesions less than 2 cm between November 2012 and June 2019. Three types of needles were evaluated in this study: a 22-gauge fine-needle aspiration (FNA) Lancet needle, a 20-gauge fine-needle biopsy (FNB) Menghini needle with a lateral forward bevel, and a 22-gauge FNB Franseen needle. We evaluated the diagnostic yield and safety of the procedure using these needles. Results  We analyzed 160 patients with 163 lesions. The overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 92.0 %, 100 %, and 92.6 %, respectively. In the histological plus cytological diagnosis, accuracies of the Lancet, Menghini, and Franseen needles were 92.7 %, 97.0 %, and 85.7 %, respectively ( P  = 0.10). In the histological diagnosis alone, the negative predictive values (NPVs) of the Lancet, Menghini, and Franseen needles were 13.3 %, 53.3 %, and 27.3 %, respectively ( P  = 0.08). Adverse events occurred in four cases (2.5 %): one postprocedural bleeding, two cases of pancreatitis, and one pancreatic abscess. Conclusions  EUS-guided tissue acquisition for small solid pancreatic lesions has a high diagnostic yield and safety. This study suggested a difference in the diagnostic yield of each needle for small solid pancreatic lesions.

Experimental model standardizing polyvinyl alcohol hydrogel to simulate endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic ultrasound-elastography

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and endoscopic ultrasound elastography (EUS-E) simulation lessens the learning curve; however, models lack realism, diminishing competitiveness.

AIM

To standardize the mechanical properties of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) hydrogel for simulating organs and digestive lesions.

METHODS

PVA hydrogel (Sigma Aldrich, degree of hydrolysis 99%) for simulating EUS/EUS-E lesions was investigated in Unidad de Investigación y Desarrollo Tecnológico at Hospital General de México “Dr. Eduardo Liceaga”, Mexico City. We evaluated physical, contrast, elasticity and deformation coefficient characteristics in lesions, applying Kappa’s concordance and satisfaction questionnaire (Likert 4-points).

RESULTS

PVA hydrogel showed stable mechanical properties. Density depended on molecular weight (MW) and concentration (C). PVA bblocks with the greatest density showed lowest tensile strength (r = -0.8, P = 0.01). Lesions were EUS-graphically visible. Homogeneous and heterogeneous examples were created from PVA blocks or PVA phantoms, exceeding (MW₂ = 146000-186000, C₉ = 15% and C₁₀ = 20%) with a density under (MW₁ = 85000-124000, C₁ = 7% and C₂ = 9%). We calculated elasticity and deformation parameters of solid (blue) areas, contrasting with the norm (Kappa = 0.8; high degree of satisfaction).

CONCLUSION

PVA hydrogels were appropriate for simulating organs and digestive lesions using EUS/EUS-E, facilitating practice and reducing risk. Repetition amplified skills, while reducing the learning curve.

Needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy in pancreatic cysts: a meta-analysis

There is currently limited evidence supporting the use of needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy in pancreatic cystic lesions. Aim of this study was to provide a pooled estimate of the diagnostic performance and safety profile of this technique in patients with pancreatic cysts. Computerized bibliographic search on the main databases was performed through November 2019. Pooled effects were calculated using a random-effects model by means of DerSimonian and Laird test. Primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy. Secondary outcomes were pooled sensitivity, specificity, and mean procedural time. Ten studies enrolling 536 patients were included. Eight articles, of which five prospective series, compared confocal laser endomicroscopy to cytology/cystic fluid analysis. Most patients were female and body/tail was the most frequent location of pancreatic cysts. Mucinous cysts were prevalent in most of the included studies. Diagnostic accuracy with confocal laser endomicroscopy was 88.6% (83.7-93.4%) and sensitivity analysis according to study quality, design, and treatment arms confirmed the above reported result. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were 82.4% (74.7-90.1%) and 96.6% (94.3-99%), respectively. Both accuracy and sensitivity resulted higher in patients with mucinous cysts (91.4 and 94.9%, respectively). Confocal laser endomicroscopy clearly outperformed fine-needle aspiration in terms of diagnostic accuracy (odds ratio 3.94, 1.58-9.82; P = 0.003). A mean of 6.094 minutes (4.91-7.26) was needed to complete the procedure and no significant adverse event was registered. Our meta-analysis speaks in favor of the use of needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy as a safe and effective tool in the diagnostic algorithm of pancreatic cysts.

Randomized trial comparing fork-tip and side-fenestrated needles for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The aim of this study was to compare the performance of EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy using fork-tip or side-fenestrated needles in patients with solid pancreatic lesions.

METHODS

A randomized controlled study was conducted in a single academic center on patients who underwent sampling with fork-tip or side-fenestrated 22-gauge or 25-gauge needles. Three passes were performed, each independently evaluated by a blinded pathologist and by endosonographers for macroscopic on-site evaluation (MOSE). The primary outcome was histologic yield; secondary aims were safety, diagnostic yield, sample quality, number of needle passes required to establish a diagnosis, and reliability of MOSE.

RESULTS

One hundred ninety-two patients were enrolled. Both 22-gauge and 25-gauge fork-tip needles retrieved significantly higher rates of histologic samples than side-fenestrated needles (P < .013). Safety and diagnostic accuracy were comparable in the 2 arms, whereas sample quality (tissue integrity and blood contamination) was significantly better in the fork-tip group (P < .0001). The median number of diagnostic passes was lower using fork-tip needles (P = .054). The agreement between MOSE and pathologic evaluation was almost perfect in the fork-tip group and fair in the side-fenestrated group.

CONCLUSIONS

Both needles showed equivalent safety and diagnostic accuracy. However, fork-tip needles provided a higher rate of extremely good-quality histologic samples and required fewer needle passes to reach a diagnosis. MOSE is a highly reliable tool when fork-tip needles are used compared with side-fenestrated needles. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03622229.).

Balloon Dilation for Endosonographic Staging in Esophageal Cancer: A Phase 1 Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Dilation in patients with malignant esophageal strictures precluding the passage of the endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) scope allows complete evaluation; however, it may be associated with complications. This study evaluates the safety and clinical value of balloon dilation to complete EUS in patients with stenotic esophageal cancers.

METHODS

This study consists of a phase I clinical trial. One-hundred-and fifty patients were recruited. Endoscopic balloon dilation was performed before EUS in patients with high-grade stenosis. The analysis was focused on the ability to complete an endosonographic examination after dilation, 30-day morbidity, and change in the final stage or definitive management based on the completed endosonographic examination.

RESULTS

Dilation was required in 55 patients (36.7%), with a complication rate of 10.9% (n = 6). Dilation allowed completion of EUS in 53 patients (96.4%), leading to a modification of the clinical stage for 18 patients (34%) and a deviation in the treatment plan in 7 patients (13.2%). No differences were found in these variables when compared with the group that did not require dilation (26.3% and 14.7%, P = .33 and P = .79, respectively). Dilation was associated with more advanced disease on final pathology among patients who underwent surgical resection (P = .006).

CONCLUSIONS

High-grade malignant esophageal strictures that preclude the passage of the ultrasound probe are associated with advanced stage disease. Owing to the high risk of perforation and the limited benefit in staging, balloon dilation to complete the EUS staging should be avoided. (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01950442.).

New Devices for Endoscopic Treatments in Gastroenterology: A Narrative Review

Endoscopy is in a period of continuous innovations in terms of image quality, endoscopes, post-processing software and lastly, application of Artificial Intelligence. Therapeutic boundaries have expanded, widening the grey zone between endoscopy and surgery, and increasing endoscopic approaches in clinical scenarios where, until a few years ago, surgery was the only option. New scopes and accessories have made it easier to access critical areas such as the biliary tree and the small bowel intestine. In the field of hepato-pancreato-biliary endoscopy (HPB), it is now possible to directly access the biliary ducts or cystic lesions though dedicated stents and scopes, rather than having to rely only on fluoroscopy and ultrasound, increasing the diagnostic and therapeutic options by applying a three-dimensional approach. This narrative review will give an overview of some of the most relevant emerging fields in luminal and HPB endoscopy, highlighting advantages and main limitations of the techniques, and providing considerations for future development.

The Utility of Endoscopic Ultrasound Fine Needle Aspiration in Pancreatic Cystic Lesions Diagnosis

The yield of biochemical analysis of pancreatic cysts fluid obtained via fine needle aspiration (FNA) is limited. We aimed to assess whether biochemical cyst analysis correlates with the endoscopic ultra-sonographic (EUS) diagnosis. A retrospective study including patients who underwent EUS-FNA was performed. Agreement level between EUS diagnosis and biochemical analysis was reported. One-hundred-and-eleven patients were included. For cyst CEA level, 42.4% of patients with endoscopic diagnosis of pancreatic mucinous cystic neoplasm (intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) and mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCN)) had CEA level >192 ng/mL vs. 15.8% of patients who had another endoscopic diagnosis (chi square = 0.03) with poor agreement level (Kappa = 0.130). For the serous cystadenoma (SCA), the levels of amylase and CEA were defined as <250 unit/L and <5 ng/mL, respectively. Eight patients (57.1%) had amylase of <250 unit/L, while 42.9% had >250 unit/L (chi square = 0.007). The agreement level between EUS diagnosis of SCA and amylase level was poor (Kappa = 0.231). For cyst CEA level, 71.4% had CEA level <5 ng/mL vs. 28.6% who had CEA >5 ng/mL (chi square < 0.001) with fair agreement level (Kappa = 0.495). EUS-FNA for pancreatic cystic lesions poorly correlated with the EUS diagnosis. FNA should be considered in the setting of EUS worrisome findings.

Diagnostic yield of EUS-guided through-the-needle biopsy in pancreatic cysts: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There is currently limited evidence supporting the use of EUS-guided through-the-needle biopsy for sampling pancreatic cystic lesions. The aim of this meta-analysis was to provide a pooled estimate of the diagnostic performance of through-the-needle biopsy for sampling of pancreatic cysts.

METHODS

A bibliographic search on the main databases was performed in September 2019. Pooled effects were calculated using a random-effects model by means of the DerSimonian and Laird test. The primary outcome was sample adequacy. Additional endpoints were diagnostic accuracy, optimal histologic core procurement, mean number of needle passes, pooled specificity, and sensitivity. Adverse event rates were also analyzed.

RESULTS

Eleven studies enrolling 490 patients were included. Eight articles compared through-the-needle biopsy with cytology/cystic fluid analysis. Most patients were female, and the body/tail was the most frequent location of cystic lesions. Sample adequacy with through-the-needle biopsy was 85.3% (78.2%-92.5%), and subanalysis performed according to cyst morphology, size, and location confirmed the result. Through-the-needle biopsy clearly outperformed FNA both in terms of sample adequacy (odds ratio, 4.83; 95% confidence interval, 1.63-14.31; P =.004) and diagnostic accuracy (odds ratio, 3.44; 95% confidence interval, 1.32-8.96; P =.01). The pooled diagnostic accuracy rate, sensitivity, and specificity of through-the-needle biopsy were 78.8%, 82.2%, and 96.8%, respectively. A mean of 3.121 (2.98-3.25) passes through the cyst was needed to obtain adequate histologic samples. The incidence rates of mild bleeding and pancreatitis were 4% and 2%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis speaks in favor of the use of through-the-needle biopsy as a safe and effective tool in EUS-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic cysts.

Non-negligible rate of needle tract seeding after endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Needle tract seeding after preoperative endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for pancreatic body and tail cancer has been reported. This study aimed to investigate the long-term outcomes, including the needle tract seeding ratio, of patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic body and tail cancer diagnosed preoperatively by EUS-FNA.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational cohort study assessed patients from three university hospitals and 11 tertiary referral centers. All patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy for invasive cancer of the pancreatic body and tail between January 2006 and December 2015 were identified and reviewed. Needle tract seeding rate, recurrence-free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of the 301 total patients analyzed, 176 underwent preoperative EUS-FNA (EUS-FNA group) and 125 did not (non-EUS-FNA group). The median follow-up periods of the EUS-FNA group and non-EUS-FNA group were 32.8 and 30.1 months. Six patients (3.4%) in the EUS-FNA group were diagnosed as having needle tract seeding. The 5-year cumulative needle tract seeding rate estimated using Fine and Gray's method was 3.8% (95% CI 1.6-7.8%). The median RFS or OS was not significantly different between the EUS-FNA group and the non-EUS-FNA group (23.7 vs 16.9 months: P = 0.205; 48.0 vs 43.9 months: P = 0.392).

CONCLUSION

Although preoperative EUS-FNA for pancreatic body and tail cancer has no negative effect on RFS or OS, needle tract seeding after EUS-FNA was observed to have a non-negligible rate. (UMIN000030719).

Challenging biliary strictures: pathophysiological features, differential diagnosis, diagnostic algorithms, and new clinically relevant biomarkers - part 1

It is frequently challenging to make the correct diagnosis in patients with biliary strictures. This is particularly important as errors may have disastrous consequences. Benign-appearing strictures treated with stents may later be revealed to be malignant and unnecessary surgery for benign strictures carries a high morbidity rate. In the first part of the review, the essential information that clinicians need to know about diseases responsible for biliary strictures is presented, with a focus on the most recent data. Then, the characteristics and pitfalls of the methods used to make the diagnosis are summarized. These include serum biomarkers, imaging studies, and endoscopic modalities. As tissue diagnosis is the only 100% specific tool, it is described in detail, including techniques for tissue acquisition and their yields, how to prepare samples, and what to expect from the pathologist. Tricks to increase diagnostic yields are described. Clues are then presented for the differential diagnosis between primary and secondary sclerosing cholangitis, IgG4-related sclerosing cholangitis, cholangiocarcinoma, pancreatic cancer, autoimmune pancreatitis, and less frequent diseases. Finally, algorithms that will help to achieve the correct diagnosis are proposed.

Evaluation of Pancreatic Lesions With Endoscopic Ultrasound and Fine Needle Aspiration

Background. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and fine-needle aspiration (FNA) are commonly used for assessing pancreatic lesions. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic yield and accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in a single tertiary institution. Methods. Consecutive patients who underwent EUS-FNA of the pancreas at Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong, from January 2015 to March 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Endoscopic findings and FNA results were analysed. For patients who subsequently underwent surgical resection of pancreatic lesion, EUS-FNA diagnoses were compared to histopathological findings of surgical specimens to determine its diagnostic accuracy. Results. One hundred twelve EUS-FNA were performed in 99 patients within the study time period and were included for analysis. Sixty-six (66.7%) pancreatic lesions were solid in nature and 33 (33.3%) were cystic. The overall diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA was 70.5% (n = 79). On multivariate analysis, more passes of needle were associated with a higher diagnostic yield (odds ratio = 2.000, P = .049). 57.1% (n = 64) of EUS-FNA results had an impact on management. Sixteen patients with diagnostic EUS-FNA subsequently underwent surgery for resection of the pancreatic lesion. Upon correlation to the histopathological findings of surgical specimens, there were 12 true-positive, 2 true-negative, 0 false-positive, and 2 false-negative cases. Sensitivity was 85.7%, specificity was 100%, positive predictive value was 100%, and negative predictive value was 50%. The diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA was 87.5%. Conclusion. EUS-FNA is accurate and reliable for diagnosing pancreatic lesions.