The yield of EUS-FNA in undiagnosed upper abdominal adenopathy is very high

Detection of Lymphadenopathy as a Precursor to Autoimmune Liver Diseases Before Clinical Hepatitis Became Apparent: A Report of Two Cases

Two patients were incidentally diagnosed with intra-abdominal lymphadenopathy on imaging examinations. Although endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of these areas of lymphadenopathy was performed, their causes remained undetermined. Neither patients had abnormal hepatic enzyme levels at the time lymphadenopathy was detected, but they developed hepatitis 20 months and five months later, respectively. The laboratory data and/or histopathological findings suggested primary biliary cholangitis/cirrhosis (PBC) and autoimmune hepatitis (AIH), respectively. These two patients were each started on appropriate treatment (ursodeoxycholic acid or prednisolone, respectively), their hepatitis ameliorated, and the hepatic enzyme levels recovered to within the normal ranges. These patients' clinical courses suggest that their lymphadenopathy was associated with PBC or AIH and appeared before the causative hepatitis became clinically apparent. We should consider the possibility of latent autoimmune hepatic diseases in cases with cryptogenic intra-abdominal lymphadenopathy even if there is no clinically apparent hepatitis.

Diagnostic role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in abdominal lymphadenopathy of unknown etiology

Background

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is an established method for the evaluation of abdominal organ lesions. However, there are few studies on EUS-FNA for abdominal lymph node (LN) lesions. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic role of EUS-FNA in isolated abdominal lymphadenopathy (LAP).

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed on patients with isolated abdominal LAP who underwent a EUS-FNA examination. The diagnosis was made based on cytology, histology, and immunohistochemical (IHC) studies. The area under curve (AUC) value, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were calculated.

Results

A total of 99 patients were included in this study. The final diagnoses were metastatic tumor (n = 32), lymphoma (n = 32), tuberculosis (n = 17), sarcoidosis (n = 5), castleman's disease (n = 1), and reactive LAP (n = 12). The AUC value, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of EUS-FNA in the diagnosis of malignant LAP were 0.9531, 90.6, 100, 100, 85.4, and 93.9%, respectively. For the diagnosis of lymphoma, the accuracy of EUS-FNA combined with IHC staining was 94.9%. Retroperitoneal LN enlargement is more commonly associated with lymphoma, while hepatic hilar LN enlargement predominantly suggests benign conditions or metastatic tumors. Malignant lymph nodes are more likely to be regular border, circular/quasi-circular, and fusion. Lymphomas are more likely to present with fusion and heterogeneous echogenicity than metastatic tumors.

Conclusion

EUS-FNA is a safe and effective method to diagnose isolated abdominal LAP.

Surveillance of Pancreatic Cystic Neoplasms

Pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs) are increasingly detected because of the widespread use of cross-sectional imaging and overall aging population. While the majority of these cysts are benign, some can progress to advanced neoplasia (defined as high-grade dysplasia and invasive cancer). As the only widely accepted treatment for PCNs with advanced neoplasia is surgical resection, accurate preoperative diagnosis, and stratification of malignant potential for deciding about surgery, surveillance or doing nothing remains a clinical challenge. Surveillance strategies for pancreatic cysts (PCNs) combine clinical evaluation and imaging to assess changes in cyst morphology and symptoms that may indicate advanced neoplasia. PCN surveillance heavily relies on various consensus clinical guidelines that focus on high-risk morphology, surgical indications, and surveillance intervals and modalities. This review will focus on current concepts in the surveillance of newly diagnosed PCNs, especially on low-risk presumed intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (those without worrisome features and high-risk stigmata), and appraise current clinical surveillance guidelines.

Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration in the Evaluation of Abdominal Lymphadenopathy of Unknown Etiology

Background/Aims

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is a standard procedure for obtaining tissue from lesions near the gastrointestinal lumen. However, there is a scarcity of information on the diagnostic performance of EUS-FNA for abdominal lymphadenopathy of unknown causes. To assess the accuracy of EUS-FNA in diagnosing abdominal lymphadenopathy of unknown etiology.

Methods

The EUS records of patients with undiagnosed abdominal lymphadenopathy between 2010 and 2015 were reviewed.

Results

A total of 42 patients were included in this study. Adequate specimens were obtained from 40 patients (95%). The final diagnoses were metastatic cancer (n=16), lymphoma (n=9), tuberculosis (n=8), inflammatory changes (n=6), and amyloidosis (n=1). For diagnosing malignancy, EUS-FNA had a sensitivity of 84.6%, specificity of 95.7%, positive predictive value of 91.7%, negative predictive value of 91.7%, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.901. For the diagnosis of lymphoma, EUS-FNA was 100% accurate when combined with cytologic evaluation and immunohistochemical staining. The diagnostic sensitivity decreased to 75%, whereas the specificity remained 100%, for tuberculosis. The overall AUROC was 0.850. No procedure-related complications occurred.

Conclusions

EUS-FNA showed high diagnostic performance for abdominal lymphadenopathy of unknown causes, especially malignancy, lymphoma, and tuberculosis. Therefore, it is a crucial diagnostic tool for this patient population.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration for the diagnosis of intra-abdominal lymphadenopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: It is difficult to diagnose the cause of abdominal lymphadenopathy without determining the primary lesions. With the advent of curved ultrasound endoscopy, EUS-FNA can sample lymph nodes safely, accurately and conveniently. Due to the lack of formal quantitative and comprehensive literature review to determine the diagnostic value of EUS-FNA in the diagnosis of enlarged intra-abdominal lymph nodes of unknown origin, we conducted this study to systematically evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA in the enlarged intra-abdominal lymph nodes.Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the accuracy of EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of intra-abdominal lymphadenopathy. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library to collect related studies and diagnostic performance data. We used a random-effects model to estimate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Heterogeneity was assessed by subgroup and meta-regression analysis.Results: Twelve eligible studies involved 774 patients were identified. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of all studies is 94% (95% CI: 91% to 96%) and 98% (95% CI: 96% to 99%), respectively. The pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios are 17.44 (95% CI, 6.50 to 46.79) and 0.09 (95% CI: 0.06 to 0.14). The pooled DOR is 277.82 (95% CI, 97.65 to 790.46).Conclusions: EUS-FNA is a safe and feasible technique with high sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of abdominal lymph node enlargement. Considering the limitations and heterogeneity, high-quality studies are needed to further explore the diagnostic value of EUS-FNA.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and cytology for differentiating benign from malignant lymph nodes

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Intra-abdominal and mediastinal lymphadenopathy are often difficult to diagnose, particularly in the absence of a primary lesion. Endosonography (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration and cytology (FNAC) has provided an easy and safe access to these lymph nodes, sparing the use of invasive and costly interventions. The main aim of this study is to assess the specificity, sensitivity, and predictive value of EUS-guided FNAC in the diagnosis of benign and malignant lymph nodes. In addition, the study aims to determine significant EUS features that could help in predicting lymph node malignancy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective study included 142 patients with intra-abdominal or intrathoracic lymphadenopathy who were referred for EUS-guided FNAC because of inaccessibility by other imaging modalities. Ninety (63.3%) patients were found to have malignant lymph nodes, and 52 (36.6%) had lymphadenopathy of benign nature.

RESULTS

EUS-guided FNAC had a sensitivity and specificity of 92% and 100% respectively. It had positive and negative predictive values of 100% and 88% for malignancy, respectively. By logistic regression analysis, EUS features and shortest diameter were found to be potential predictors of malignancy with p-value of <0.0001.

CONCLUSION

EUS-guided FNAC is a powerful modality in the diagnosis of benign and malignant lymph nodes. Additional complementary EUS features could be added to this technique for definitive diagnosis.

Prevalence, Diagnosis and Management of Pancreatic Cystic Neoplasms: Current Status and Future Directions

Cystic neoplasms of the pancreas are found with increasing prevalence, especially in elderly asymptomatic individuals. Although the overall risk of malignancy is very low, the presence of these pancreatic cysts is associated with a large degree of anxiety and further medical investigation due to concerns about malignancy. This review discusses the different cystic neoplasms of the pancreas and reports diagnostic strategies based on clinical features and imaging data. Surgical and nonsurgical management of the most common cystic neoplasms, based on the recently revised Sendai guidelines, is also discussed, with special reference to intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN; particularly the branch duct variant), which is the lesion most frequently identified incidentally. IPMN pathology, its risk for development into pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, the pros and cons of current guidelines for management, and the potential role of endoscopic ultrasound in determining cancer risk are discussed. Finally, surgical treatment, strategies for surveillance of pancreatic cysts, and possible future directions are discussed.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-fine needle aspiration versus PET-CT in undiagnosed mediastinal and upper abdominal lymphadenopathy: a comparative clinical study

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

The wide use of PET-CT for the staging of neoplasms has extended to enlarged lymph nodes of unknown origin. Nevertheless, upper abdominal and mediastinal nodes are accessible to endoscopic ultrasonography-fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), providing a cytological diagnosis, with a high diagnostic yield in previous reports. In this paper, we have compared the accuracy of both procedures in this particular setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

After the finding of a lymphadenopathy in a conventional CT, both PET-CT and EUS-FNA were performed. The endoscopist had no information about PET-CT results. FNA was performed after a systematic EUS exam, with a 25 G needle and no suction. We considered the pathologic results as the gold standard or, if not available, the patients' outcome as a surrogate marker.

RESULTS

A total of 54 patients were included. Common locations of nodes included subcarinal space (33.3%), porta hepatis (31.5%), upper mediastinum (15%), peripancreatic (7.4%), and other locations (12.8%). Adequate specimens were obtained in 48/54 patients (89%). The most common diagnoses based on cytology were benign/reactive (42%), epidermoid carcinoma (8.4%), lymphoma (8.4%), and ductal adenocarcinoma of pancreatic origin (6.3%). PET was positive in 67% of patients. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and overall accuracy of EUS-FNA were 91.3, 100, 100, 92.5, and 95.8%, respectively. The same values for PET-CT were 75, 25, 50, 50, and 50%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In our series, EUS-FNA has proven to be the best diagnostic procedure to accurately establish the etiology of isolated adenopathies, showing a much better diagnostic yield than PET-CT, the role of which should be re-evaluated in this setting.

How good is fine needle aspiration? What results should you expect?

Tissue acquisition plays a key role before treatment decision in most of oncological pathologies but also in several benign diseases. By offering tissue sampling, endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has become an essential tool in the diagnostic processes. One of the reasons for the success of the technique is related to its excellent diagnostic performance. The diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA is above 80% for most of the usual indications. These performances are however dependent on some factors related to both the disease and patient's medical history but also related to medical staff expertise. Endoscopist needs to know how to reach a lesion but also how to efficiently acquire good tissue samples. This review aims to report general recommendations available in the literature for high quality EUS-FNA. Sample processing and sample interpretation also influence diagnostic accuracy of FNA. This paper includes a discussion on sample processing and benefits of the on-site pathology examination. It also provides the results reported in the literature of sample adequacy and diagnostic performance of EUS-FNA for most common indications: Pancreatic diseases, sub-mucosal lesion, mucosal thickenings, lymph nodes, cystic lesion and free fluids.

Beyond cytology: why and when does the oncologist require core tissue?

There are 2 main reasons why oncologists may require additional tissue and a histologic section in addition to cytopathology from FNA specimens: improved diagnostic accuracy and molecular characterization of tumors. Rather than mutually exclusive diagnostic procedures, EUS-FNA and EUS-CNB must be viewed as supplementary techniques and both approaches should be incorporated as essential tools in the current endoscopic armamentarium.