Diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound with fine-needle aspiration in pancreatic cystic lesions

Risk of Pancreatitis After Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration of Pancreatic Cystic Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is frequently used to risk-stratify pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs). Rising PCL incidence and developments in tissue acquisition and specimen analysis necessitate updated appraisal of EUS-FNA safety, particularly the risk of postprocedure pancreatitis, the most common EUS-FNA-related adverse event. Our systematic review aims to accurately quantify the risk of EUS-FNA-related pancreatitis to best inform decisions regarding EUS-FNA's optimal role in PCL workup.

METHODS

We performed systematic searches in 4 databases from inception to April 2024 for original English-language studies investigating EUS-FNA-related pancreatitis. We extracted data on demographics and EUS-FNA-related pancreatitis risk, severity, and risk factors. These were meta-analyzed through the DerSimonian Laird Method using a random-effects model. Meta-regression of pancreatitis risk was performed to delineate associations with clinical and procedural characteristics.

RESULTS

Sixty-four studies comprised 8,086 patients and reported 110 EUS-FNA-related pancreatitis events. Pooled risk of EUS-FNA-related pancreatitis was 1.4% (95% confidence intervals, -0.8% to 3.5%; I2 = 0.00), which was predominantly of mild severity (67%) and uniformly nonfatal. Pancreatitis risk lacked significant association with sample size, age, sex, cyst size, needle caliber, or passes, although we noted trends toward higher risk in studies published after 2015, those using higher gauge needles (19 G vs 22 G/25 G), and those performing EUS-guided through-the-needle biopsy.

DISCUSSION

We note with high certainty that pancreatitis after EUS-FNA of PCLs is infrequent and mild in severity with no mortality in the included cohort. EUS-guided through-the-needle biopsy may serve as a significant risk factor for EUS-FNA-related pancreatitis risk; however, further studies are needed to delineate other predisposing characteristics.

Utility of Cyst Fluid Carcinoembryonic Antigen in Differentiating Mucinous and Non-mucinous Pancreatic Cysts: An Updated Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Mucinous pancreatic cysts are considered premalignant and managed differently compared to benign pancreatic cystic lesions. The aim of this updated meta-analysis is to assess the diagnostic accuracy of cyst carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in differentiating between mucinous and non-mucinous pancreatic cysts.

METHODS

Studies comparing the diagnostic accuracy of CEA (cutoff level of 192 ng/mL) in differentiating between mucinous and non-mucinous pancreatic cysts were searched in Medline, Ovid journals, Medline nonindexed citations, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews. Pooled estimates of diagnostic precision were calculated using random and fixed effects models.

RESULTS

Initial search identified 526 reference articles, of these 34 relevant articles were selected and reviewed. Data were extracted from 15 studies (n = 2063) which met the inclusion criteria. The pancreatic cystic fluid CEA level at a 192 ng/mL cutoff value had pooled specificity of 88.6% (95% CI 85.9-90.9) and pooled sensitivity was found to be 60.4% (95% CI 57.7-62.9). The pooled positive likelihood ratio was 4.5 (95% CI 2.9-6.9) and the pooled negative likelihood ratio was 0.45 (95% CI 0.38-0.52). The pooled diagnostic odds ratio, the odds of having mucinous cyst with elevated CEA, was 11.4 (95% CI 6.9-18.7). The P for chi-squared heterogeneity for all the pooled accuracy estimates was > 0.10.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis suggests that the cyst fluid CEA level at a 192 ng/mL cutoff value is highly specific in the diagnosis of mucinous cystic lesions with reasonable sensitivity.