"Wet suction technique (WEST)": a novel way to enhance the quality of EUS-FNA aspirate. Results of a prospective, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial using a 22-gauge needle for EUS-FNA of solid lesions

Study Protocol for a Prospective Self-Controlled Trial on Success in Meeting Comprehensive Genomic Profiling Analysis Criteria for Specimens Obtained by Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition Using a 19G Needle from Primary and Metastatic Lesions in Pancreatic Cancer with Metastatic Lesions: The PRIMATE Study

EUS-TA in unresectable pancreatic cancer requires not only a tissue diagnosis but also tissue collection in anticipation of comprehensive genomic profiling. However, the optimal puncture target remains controversial. Therefore, the Primary and Metastatic Lesions in Pancreatic Cancer (PRIMATE) study was designed to clarify the optimal target by comparing the success rates for meeting OncoGuide NCC Oncopanel (NOP) analysis criteria on pre-check primary and metastatic lesion specimens obtained during the same EUS-TA session in patients with invasive pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. In this ongoing prospective study, two specimens, each from primary and metastatic lesions, are obtained by EUS-TA (typically using a 19G fine-needle biopsy needle) in patients with invasive pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. The primary endpoint is the proportion of EUS-TA specimens that meet NOP analysis criteria during pre-check (i.e., tumor cellularity of ≥20% and a tissue area of ≥4 mm2), which are then compared between primary and metastatic lesions. This study has been approved by the National Cancer Center Institutional Review Board (Research No. 2022-168). The results of this study will be reported at an international conference and published in an international peer-reviewed journal. The trial registration number is UMIN 000048966.

Consensus statements on endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition. Guidelines from the Asian Endoscopic Ultrasound Group

OBJECTIVES

This consensus was developed by the Asian EUS Group (AEG), who aimed to formulate a set of practice guidelines addressing various aspects of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA).

METHODS

The AEG initiated the development of consensus statements and formed an expert panel comprising surgeons, gastroenterologists, and pathologists. Three online consensus meetings were conducted to consolidate the statements and votes. The statements were presented and discussed in the first two consensus meetings and revised according to comments. Final voting was conducted at a third consensus meeting. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was adopted to define the strength of the recommendations and quality of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 20 clinical questions and statements regarding EUS-TA were formulated. The committee recommended that fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles be preferred over conventional fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needles for EUS-TA of subepithelial lesions. For solid pancreatic masses, rapid on-site evaluation is not routinely recommended when FNB needles are used. For dedicated FNB needles, fork-tip and Franseen-tip needles have essentially equivalent performance.

CONCLUSION

This consensus provides guidance for EUS-TA, thereby enhancing the quality of EUS-TA.

Outcomes of Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine Needle Biopsy Using a Novel Hydrostatic Stylet Tissue Acquisition Technique

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) is frequently used to obtain core samples of solid lesions. Here, we describe and evaluate a novel hydrostatic stylet (HS) technique designed to optimize core sample acquisition, reporting diagnostic yield, efficacy, and safety relative to the conventional stylet slow-pull (SP) technique.

METHODS

A novel HS technique was developed and validated retrospectively. Consecutive patients who underwent EUS-FNB with core biopsy of solid lesions through either the HS or SP technique between January 2020 and April 2022 were included. Exclusion criteria included cystic lesions, nonlesional liver biopsies, and specimens sent for cytologic analysis only. Patient and lesion characteristics, number of passes, sample adequacy, and adverse events were compared between the two techniques.

RESULTS

A total of 272 patients were included with 138 in the HS group and 134 in the SP group. Lesion size and anatomic distribution were similar in both groups. Compared with the SP approach, the HS technique demonstrated significantly higher sample adequacy (97.8% vs 83.6%, P < 0.001), higher sensitivity (97.1% vs 89.7%, P = 0.03), and lower mean number of passes (1.2 vs 3.3, P < 0.001). Rates and severity of adverse events in the HS group were comparable to the SP group and existing literature. Similar associations were observed in pancreatic and nonpancreatic lesion subanalyses.

CONCLUSIONS

The novel HS technique demonstrated excellent biopsy sample adequacy and diagnostic yield while requiring fewer passes to obtain diagnostic specimens compared with a conventional EUS-FNB approach. Further prospective evaluation is needed to confirm these pilot findings and optimize EUS-FNB acquisition techniques.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is the first-choice procedure for obtaining pathological tissue samples from gastrointestinal (GI) subepithelial lesions (SELs). However, its diagnostic accuracy is lower than that for pancreatic masses owing to puncture difficulty and the need for immunostaining for definitive diagnosis. The advent of fine-needle biopsy needles, which have become well known in recent years, improves the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA for GI SELs. The forward-viewing echoendoscope and rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) have also helped to improve diagnostic accuracy. Furthermore, in facilities where ROSE is not available, endosonographers perform a macroscopic on-site evaluation. With these procedural innovations, EUS-FNA is now performed aggressively even for SELs smaller than 20 mm. The incidence of procedure-related adverse events such as bleeding and infection is low, and thus, EUS-FNA can be safely performed to diagnose SELs.

The history of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration: development and progress

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is an important diagnostic technique to accurately diagnose diseases originating from organs near the gastrointestinal tract. EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) has improved the histopathological diagnosis. EUS-FNA has been further developed over a long period of 40 years. The history of the development of endosonographic scopes, ultrasonographic observation systems, puncture needles, and puncture methods will provide a springboard for future development.

Comparation of 5 ml and 10 ml Negative Pressures with Wet-suction Techniques for EUS-FNA of Solid Lesions: A Single-center Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The negative pressure selectable for the wet-suction technique remains uncertain. The aim was to investigate the quality of sampling and diagnostic accuracy with solid lesions by 5 mL and 10 mL negative pressure with wet-suction techniques.

METHODS

This is a single-center, crossover, randomized controlled trial conducted with a random sampling technique. In all, 160 patients consecutively undergoing EUS-FNA for solid lesions were randomized in a ratio of 1:1 into 2 groups, the 5 mL and 10 mL negative pressure wet-suction group. The main outcome was to compare the sample quality between the 2 groups. The secondary outcome was to compare the histologic and cytologic diagnostic accuracy of solid lesions.

RESULTS

Pancreatic (n=129) and nonpancreatic (n=27) lesions from 156 lesions were examined. The sample quality concluding cellularity, adequacy, integrity, and blood contamination were comparable between the 2 groups. However, in subgroup analysis, we found 19G FNA provided more integrity of specimen in 5 mL than in 10 mL group (100% vs. 82.9%, P=0.025). In contrast, this benefit was not noteworthy in the 22G FNA subgroup. And there was no statistically significant in histologic (87.82% vs. 87.18%, P=1.000) and cytologic (78.85% vs. 80.77%, P=0.778) accuracy between 5 mL and 10 mL groups.

CONCLUSION

When using the wet-suction technique, 5 mL and 10 mL negative pressure offer equivalent sample quality and diagnostic accuracy. However, the 19G FNA can obtain better sample quality with 5 mL negative pressure than 10 mL negative pressure.

Endohepatology: The endoscopic armamentarium in the hand of the hepatologist

ABSTRACT

Recent advances in the field of hepatology include new and effective treatments for viral hepatitis. Further effort is now being directed to other disease entities, such as non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, with an increased need for assessment of liver function and histology. In fact, with the evolving nomenclature of fat-associated liver disease and the emergence of the term "metabolic-associated fatty liver disease" (MAFLD), new diagnostic challenges have emerged as patients with histologic absence of steatosis can still be classified under the umbrella of MAFLD. Currently, there is a growing number of endoscopic procedures that are pertinent to patients with liver disease. Indeed, interventional radiologists mostly perform interventional procedures such as percutaneous and intravascular procedures, whereas endoscopists focus on screening for and treatment of esophageal and gastric varices. EUS has proven to be of value in many areas within the realm of hepatology, including liver biopsy, assessment of liver fibrosis, measurement of portal pressure, managing variceal bleeding, and EUS-guided paracentesis. In this review article, we will address the endoscopic applications that are used to manage patients with chronic liver disease.

Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Diagnosis of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the most common (90%) type of solid pancreatic neoplasm. Due to its late presentation and poor survival rate, early diagnosis and timely treatment is of utmost importance for better clinical outcomes. Endoscopic ultrasound provides high-resolution images of the pancreas and has excellent sensitivity in the diagnosis of even small (<2 cm) pancreatic lesions. Apart from imaging, it also has an advantage of tissue acquisition (EUS fine-needle aspiration, FNA; or fine-needle biopsy, FNB) for definitive diagnoses. EUS-guided tissue acquisition plays a crucial role in genomic and molecular studies, which in today's era of personalized medicine, are likely to become important components of PDAC management. With the use of better needle designs and technical advancements, EUS has now become an indispensable tool in the management of PDAC. Lastly, artificial intelligence for the detection of pancreatic lesions and newer automated needles for tissue acquisition will obviate observer dependency in the near future, resulting in the wider dissemination and adoption of this technology for improved outcomes in patients with PDAC.

Dry suction versus wet suction technique of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy for diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: study protocol of a multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Studies have shown that the wet suction technique in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) generates better histological diagnostic accuracy and specimen quality than the dry suction technique. However, conclusions of wet suction on the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) are still controversial. Besides, the optimal number of passes for EUS-FNB has not been determined. We aimed to design a large multicenter randomized trial to compare the diagnostic accuracy of dry suction versus wet suction technique in solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs) using 22G Franseen needles and determine the optimal number of passes required for EUS-FNB.

METHODS

This is a multi-center open-label, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial with two parallel groups. Two hundred patients with SPLs will undergo EUS-FNB using 22G Franseen needles in 4 tertiary hospitals in China and will be randomly assigned to the dry suction group and wet suction group in a ratio of 1:1. The primary endpoint is diagnostic accuracy. Secondary endpoints include the optimal number of needle passes, sensitivity, specificity, specimen quality, cytological diagnoses, time of the procedure, and incidence of complications.

DISCUSSION

This study has been designed to determine (i) whether EUS-FNB using 22G Franseen needle with dry suction is non-inferior to wet suction in terms of diagnostic accuracy and (ii) the optimal number of passes during EUS-FNB of SPLs using 22G Franseen needle.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05549856. Registered on September 22, 2022.

The efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy in gallbladder masses

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) is a widely used modality for acquiring various target samples, but its efficacy in gallbladder masses is unknown. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-FNB in patients with gallbladder masses.

METHODS

The study samples were composed of patients from March 2015 to July 2019 who needed to identify the nature of gallbladder masses through EUS-FNB. The outcomes of this study were the adequacy of specimens, diagnostic yields, technical feasibility, and adverse events of the EUS-FNB in gallbladder masses.

RESULTS

A total of 27 consecutive patients with a median age of 58 years were included in this study. The 22-gauge FNB needle was feasible in all lesions. The median follow-up period of the patients was 294 days. The specimens sufficient for diagnosis account for 89% (24/27) and 93% (25/27) in cytology and histology, respectively. The overall diagnostic yields for malignancy showed the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were 95.45% [95% confidence interval (CI): 75.12%-99.76%], 100% (95% CI: 46.29%-100%), 100% (95% CI: 80.76%-100%), 83.33% (95% CI: 36.48%-99.12%), and 96.30% (95% CI: 80.20%-99.99%), respectively. The subgroup analysis revealed that FNB could obtain sufficient specimens and high diagnostic yields in both gallbladder mass < 20.5 mm group and ≥ 20.5 mm group. One patient experienced mild abdominal pain after the procedure and recovered within one day.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-FNB is a reasonable diagnostic tool for the pretreatment diagnosis of patients with gallbladder masses, especially for patients who may miss the opportunity of surgery and need sufficient specimens to identify the pathological type so as to determine chemotherapy regimens. Further large-scale studies are needed to confirm our conclusion.

Comparing fine needle biopsy techniques in solid pancreatic lesions: A prospective randomized study

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsies (EUS-FNB) are the best technique for sampling solid pancreatic lesions. However, the most appropriate biopsy technique has not been standardized using Fine Needle Biopsy (FNB) needles. The aim of this work was to identify the best biopsy technique to achieve the best tissue integrity and cause the least blood contamination.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients ≥18 years of age with solid pancreatic lesions who underwent EUS-FNB at our institution from January 2020 to May 2021 were consecutively selected. Three passes were performed with each of the threee techniques to obtain tissue: suction with 10 ml of vacuum, capillary, and wet. An independent pathologist evaluated the received tissue integrity and the degree of blood contamination of each sample according to scales.

RESULTS

Seventy-five patients were recruited for our study. A superior tissue integrity was observed using the wet-suction technique in lesions located in the body and/or tail of the pancreas, and an average score of 4.40 (p = 0.027) was assigned for this technique. Regarding the contamination of the sample in the whole cohort, the simple-suction technique shown a higher contamination, 1.55 (p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference among the techniques when evaluating tissue integrity or contamination in lesions larger or smaller than 3 cm.

CONCLUSION

When performing EUS-FNB for solid pancreatic lesions located in the head/uncinated process, the three methods provided similar diagnostic yields. The wet-suction technique had a higher score in tissue integrity when lesions were located in the body and/or tail of the pancreas.

Comparison of suction techniques for EUS-guided tissue acquisition: Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background and study aims Despite the widespread use of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition, the choice of optimal suction technique remains a subject of debate. Multiple studies have shown conflicting results with respect to the four suction techniques: Dry suction (DS), no suction (NS), stylet slow-pull (SSP) and wet suction (WS). Thus, the present network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to compare the diagnostic yields of above suction techniques during EUS-guided tissue acquisition. Methods A comprehensive literature search from 2010 to March 2022 was done for randomized trials comparing the aspirated sample and diagnostic outcome with various suction techniques. Both pairwise and network meta-analyses were performed to analyze the outcomes: sample adequacy, moderate to high cellularity, gross bloodiness and diagnostic accuracy. Results A total of 16 studies (n=2048 patients) were included in the final NMA. WS was associated with a lower odd of gross bloodiness compared to DS (odds ratio 0.50, 95% confidence interval 0.24-0.97). There was no significant difference between the various suction methods with respect to sample adequacy, moderate to high cellularity and diagnostic accuracy. On meta-regression, to adjust for the effect of needle type, WS was comparable to DS in terms of bloodiness when adjusted for fine-needle aspiration needle. Surface under the cumulative ranking analysis ranked WS as the best modality for all the outcomes. Conclusions The present NMA did not show superiority of any specific suction technique for EUS-guided tissue sampling with regard to sample quality or diagnostic accuracy, with low confidence in estimates.

Twenty versus 40 back-and-forth needle movements for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic masses: a prospective, crossover, randomized study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

In endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-fine-needle biopsy (FNB) of solid pancreatic mass lesions, the number of times the needle moves back and forth within the lesion might affect the collection of the sample and the subsequent diagnostic accuracy. Thus, this study was designed to compare the diagnostic adequacy between different numbers of back-and-forth movements in EUS-FNB.

METHODS

Fifty-five patients with solid pancreatic masses underwent EUS-FNB sampling with the needle (22-gauge) moved 20 times (MTT) and 40 times (MFT) randomly and sequentially for a total of four alternating passes. We compared the acquisition rate of appropriate and adequate specimens for histologic assessment and diagnostic accuracy.

RESULTS

Finally, 55 patients (35 men and 20 women) were included in the study. We found that 56.4% (31/55) and 60% (33/55) of the specimens obtained using MTT and MFT, respectively, could be adequately diagnosed histologically (P = 0.815, McNemar test). The diagnostic accuracy of MTT and MFT was 72.7% (40/55) and 80% (44/55), respectively (P = 0.289, McNemar test). The overall diagnostic accuracy was 89.1%.

CONCLUSION

There was no significant statistical difference between the histopathological diagnostic samples obtained in MTT and those obtained in MFT. Therefore, a large number of back-and-forth movements of the needle should be avoided during EUS-FNB, which can help reduce the operation time and may reduce the risk of intraoperative and postoperative complications (Clinical trial registration number: ChiCTR2000031106).

EUS-guided FNAC in intra-abdominal lesions: Technique of tissue acquisition, ancillary testing, pearls and perils, and prospects

Endoscopic ultrasound enables visualization of lesions within and in the vicinity of the gastrointestinal tract. Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration cytology (EUS-FNAC) helps in targeting various luminal and extraluminal lesions both diagnostically and therapeutically. Various intra-abdominal organs amenable to EUS-FNA include the gastrointestinal tract (GIT), pancreas, kidney, adrenal gland, liver, bile duct, gallbladder, spleen, and lymph nodes. EUS-FNAC is mostly done for pancreatic and intra-abdominal lymph nodal lesions. In the present review, we have discussed various aspects of EUS-FNAC.

Quantitative analysis of tissue area of endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy specimens using 19-gauge fine-needle biopsy needle in patients with diffuse liver disease: A single-center retrospective study

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) is a novel liver biopsy technique. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-LB in comparison with percutaneous liver biopsy (PLB).

METHODS

This retrospective study evaluated the safety and efficacy of EUS-LB using a 19-gauge fine needle biopsy (FNB) needle compared with PLB using a spring-loaded 16-gauge needle in patients with diffuse liver disease at our hospital from April 2017 to December 2020. The primary outcomes included the total hepatic tissue surface area and the total number of portal tracts. Secondary outcomes included the success and adverse event rates.

RESULTS

Twenty patients each underwent EUS-LB and PLB. There was no statistical difference in the sum of liver tissue surface area (22 mm² vs 22.6 mm² , P = .910) and the total number of portal tracts (29 vs 25, P = .916). The success rate was 95% (19/20) for EUS-LB and 100% (20/20) for PLB (P = 1). There were two adverse events in the PLB group but none in the EUS-LB group (P = .487).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy using FNB has an optimal tissue yield and success rate and is safe compared to PLB. Thus, EUS-LB may be a new alternative to PLB.

The Wet Suction Technique Enhances the Diagnostic Efficacy and Aspirate Quality of EUS-FNA for Solid Lesions: A Multicenter Retrospective Study in China

GOALS

To comprehensively compare the wet suction technique with the conventional dry suction technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in solid lesions.

BACKGROUND

Optimal suction techniques for EUS-FNA remain uncertain when approaching solid lesions.

STUDY

We performed a retrospective study of EUS-FNA at 3 medical centers in China. A total of 203 patients were enrolled who received 2 passes of EUS-FNA with 22-G needles. If the first pass underwent dry suction, the second pass was wet suction. Otherwise, the order of suction technique is opposite. Diagnostic accuracy, sample quality (including cellularity and blood contamination), and sample quantity (including specimen adequacy, the maximum intact specimen length, and the total specimen length) were compared between wet-suction and dry-suction techniques.

RESULTS

The patients included 143 pancreatic lesions and 60 nonpancreatic lesions. Compared with the dry suction technique, the wet suction technique yielded a significantly higher diagnostic accuracy (85.22% vs. 72.41%, P =0.002), better specimen adequacy score and cellularity score ( P <0.0001), and lower blood contamination score ( P <0.0001). In the subgroup analysis, wet suction provided significantly higher diagnostic accuracy in pancreatic cancer without chronic pancreatitis ( P <0.05), and better cellularity score and specimen adequacy score, lower blood contamination score, and longer maximum intact specimen length and total specimen length in various lesions than that in dry suction.

CONCLUSIONS

The wet suction technique resulted in significantly higher diagnostic accuracy in pancreatic cancer without chronic pancreatitis, and better cellularity and histologic specimen in most of solid lesions.

Comprehensive review on endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition techniques for solid pancreatic tumor

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is speculated to become the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality by 2030, a high mortality rate considering the number of cases. Surgery and chemotherapy are the main treatment options, but they are burdensome for patients. A clear histological diagnosis is needed to determine a treatment plan, and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition (TA) is a suitable technique that does not worsen the cancer-specific prognosis even for lesions at risk of needle tract seeding. With the development of personalized medicine and precision treatment, there has been an increasing demand to increase cell counts and collect specimens while preserving tissue structure, leading to the development of the fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle. EUS-FNB is rapidly replacing EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) as the procedure of choice for EUS-TA of pancreatic cancer. However, EUS-FNA is sometimes necessary where the FNB needle cannot penetrate small hard lesions, so it is important clinicians are familiar with both. Given these recent dev-elopments, we present an up-to-date review of the role of EUS-TA in pancreatic cancer. Particularly, technical aspects, such as needle caliber, negative pressure, and puncture methods, for obtaining an adequate specimen in EUS-TA are discussed.

Tissue Quality Comparison Between Heparinized Wet Suction and Dry Suction in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Fine Needle Biopsy of Solid Pancreatic Masses: A Randomized Crossover Study

Background/Aims

A high-quality sample allows for next-generation sequencing and the administration of more tailored precision medicine treatments. We aimed to evaluate whether heparinized wet suction can obtain higher quality samples than the standard dry-suction method during endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biopsy of pancreatic masses.

Methods

A prospective randomized crossover study was conducted. Patients with a solid pancreatic mass were randomly allocated to receive either heparinized wet suction first or dry suction first. For each method, two needle passes were made, followed by a switch to the other method for a total of four needle punctures. The primary outcome was the aggregated white tissue length. Histological blood contamination, diagnostic performance and adverse events were analyzed as secondary outcomes. In addition, the correlation between white tissue length and the extracted DNA amount was analyzed.

Results

A total of 50 patients were enrolled, and 200 specimens were acquired (100 with heparinized wet suction and 100 with dry suction), with one minor bleeding event. The heparinized wet suction approach yielded specimens with longer aggregated white tissue length (11.07 mm vs 7.96 mm, p=0.001) and less blood contamination (p=0.008). A trend towards decreasing tissue quality was observed for the 2nd pass of the dry-suction method, leading to decreased diagnostic sensitivity and accuracy, although the accumulated diagnostic performance was comparable between the two suction methods. The amount of extracted DNA correlated positively to the white tissue length (p=0.001, Spearman̕s ρ=0.568).

Conclusions

Heparinized wet suction for EUS tissue acquisition of solid pancreatic masses can yield longer, bloodless, DNA-rich tissue without increasing the incidence of adverse events (ClinicalTrials.gov. identifier NCT04707560).

The Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Hepatology

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has been an indispensable and widely used diagnostic tool in several medical fields, including gastroenterology, cardiology, and urology, due to its diverse therapeutic and diagnostic applications. Many studies show that it is effective and safe in patients with liver conditions where conventional endoscopy or cross-sectional imaging are inefficient or when surgical interventions pose high risks. In this article, we present a review of the current literature for the different diagnostic and therapeutic applications of EUS in liver diseases and their complications and discuss the potential future application of artificial intelligence analysis of EUS.

Wet-suction versus slow-pull technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy: a multicenter, randomized, crossover trial

BACKGROUND : It is unknown whether there is an advantage to using the wet-suction or slow-pull technique during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) with new-generation needles. We aimed to compare the performance of each technique in EUS-FNB.

METHODS

 This was a multicenter, randomized, single-blind, crossover trial including patients with solid lesions of ≥ 1 cm. Four needle passes with 22 G fork-tip or Franseen-type needles were performed, alternating the wet-suction and slow-pull techniques in a randomized order. The primary outcome was the histological yield (samples containing an intact piece of tissue of at least 550 μm). Secondary end points were sample quality (tissue integrity and blood contamination), diagnostic accuracy, and adequate tumor fraction.

RESULTS

 Overall, 210 patients with 146 pancreatic and 64 nonpancreatic lesions were analyzed. A tissue core was retrieved in 150 (71.4 %) and 129 (61.4 %) cases using the wet-suction and the slow-pull techniques, respectively (P = 0.03). The mean tissue integrity score was higher using wet suction (P = 0.02), as was the blood contamination of samples (P < 0.001). In the two subgroups of pancreatic and nonpancreatic lesions, tissue core rate and tissue integrity score were not statistically different using the two techniques, but blood contamination was higher with wet suction. Diagnostic accuracy and tumor fraction did not differ between the two techniques.

CONCLUSION

 Overall, the wet-suction technique in EUS-FNB resulted in a higher tissue core procurement rate compared with the slow-pull method. Diagnostic accuracy and the rate of samples with adequate tumor fraction were similar between the two techniques.

Optimal sampling technique for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions using a 25-gauge ProCore needle: A multicenter randomized crossover superiority study

Background and Objectives

It remains unclear whether the use of the stylet slow-pull (SP) and wet suction (WS) can improve the yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy compared to standard suction (SS). The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic efficacy of the three sampling techniques when using 25G ProCore needles for solid pancreatic lesions.

Materials and Methods

This multicenter single-blind randomized crossover superiority trial enrolled patients with solid pancreatic lesions (n = 300) from four digestive endoscopic centers in China. All three sampling techniques were performed on each patient using a 25G ProCore needle in a randomized sequence. The diagnostic efficacy, the specimen yield, and quality of each technique, the overall technical success rate and diagnostic yield of the 25G ProCore needle, and rate of adverse events were evaluated.

Results

A total of 291 patients were analyzed. No significant difference was found in diagnostic efficiency among the three techniques (sensitivity, 82.14% vs. 75.00% vs. 77.86, P = 0.1186; accuracy, 82.82% vs. 75.95% vs. 78.69%, P = 0.1212). The SP had an inferior tissue integrity compared to the SS and WS techniques (71.82% vs. 62.55% vs. 69.76%, P = 0.0096). There was no significant difference in the degree of blood contamination among the three groups (P = 0.2079). After three passes, the overall sensitivity was 93.93%, and the accuracy was 94.16%.

Conclusions

SS and WS techniques are better choices than SP technique for 25G ProCore needle, for they could provide higher specimen adequacy without increasing the amount of blood contamination. The 25G ProCore needle can provide a satisfactory diagnostic yield for solid pancreatic lesions.

Actual pressure generated by various suction technique and suctioning liquid weight through endoscopic ultrasound-guided aspiration needles

OBJECTIVES

Suction pressure is one of the most important factors influencing the amount of tissue obtained during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration/biopsy (EUS-FNA/FNB). In this study we aimed to elucidate actual suction pressure generated by various suction methods and the weight of suctioning liquid.

METHODS

Different types of fine needles and suction techniques were used, including the slow pull technique (SPT), dry suction technique (DST), wet suction technique (WST), neutralizing negative pressure technique (NNPT), and residual negative pressure technique (RNPT). Actual suction pressure was measured and the amount of suctioning liquid was weighed.

RESULTS

Actual suction pressure and weight of the suctioning liquid were lower using SPT than using DST, while they were higher when using WST compared with those using DST. In general, the actual suction pressure increased and the weight of suctioning liquid decreased as the diameter of the FNA needles decreased. While weight of the suctioning liquid using FNB needles was significantly larger than that using FNA needles. In general, the actual suction pressure generated using RNPT was larger than that using NNPT.

CONCLUSIONS

WST is superior to SPT and DST in terms of actual suction pressure and weight of suctioning liquid. Diameter of the FNA needle was an important factor that may affect the actual suction pressure and weight of suctioning liquid. FNB needles are superior to FNA needles when it comes to the weight of suctioning liquid. Actual suction pressure obtained by novel suction methods (NNPT and RNPT) may provide a basis for future research.

Historical perspective on needle development: From the past to the future

With the introduction of EUS, endoscopy was no longer limited to luminal indications. However, the method was unable to distinguish malignant from benign lesions. Consequently, needles designed for tissue acquisition under EUS-guidance was designed. Initially, the needles were designed for fine needle aspiration (FNA); nevertheless, with increased requirement for the precured tissue in terms of quality and quantity, newly design needles aimed at obtaining tissue cores for histological assessment were developed. Recent studies demonstrate superiority of these fine needle biopsy needles (FNB) compared to FNA needles.

"Wet Heparin" and "Wet Saline" EUS-Guided Liver Biopsy Techniques Both Provide High Rates of Specimen Adequacy for Benign Parenchymal Liver Disease

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) has emerged as a viable mean to obtain core tissue, but the optimal tools and techniques are still an area of active investigation.

AIMS

(1) To compare tissue adequacy using "wet saline" (WS) vs. "wet heparin" (WH) technique (2) To compare post-procedure pain between EUS-LB and percutaneous liver biopsy (PLB).

METHODS

Retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent EUS-LB and PLB for benign parenchymal liver disease between May 2017 to October 2019 at a single tertiary veterans affairs medical center.

RESULTS

About 257 biopsies from 217 patients were included. Among the 102 EUS-LB specimens, 53 were obtained using WS technique and 49 were obtained using WH technique. Specimen adequacy was similar in both groups. Median Aggregate Specimen Length (ASL) and length of longest piece did not differ significantly between WS and WH groups. Clots were present more frequently in the WS group. Among patients who underwent EUS-LB of both right and left liver lobes, an adequate biopsy was obtained in 85% of patients in the WS group and 96% of patients in the WH group. The percentage of patients experiencing immediate post-procedure pain was higher with PLB compared to EUS-LB, but these results were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Both WS and WH EUS-LB techniques can offer high rates of specimen adequacy with low rates of pain and other post-procedure complications.

Fine Needle Biopsies of Solid Pancreatic Lesions: Tissue Acquisition Technique and Needle Design Do Not Impact Specimen Adequacy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Data on adequacy of EUS guided biopsies using different tissue acquisition techniques and fine needle aspiration needle designs have been inconclusive. Data on newer fine needle biopsy (FNB) needles are scarce. This study compared the performance of 3 acquisition techniques and 2 fine needle biopsy designs in solid pancreatic lesions.

METHODS

Single-center, randomized, pilot clinical trial (Trial registration number NCT03264092). Patients undergoing EUS biopsy of pancreatic lesions were randomized to 1 of 3 acquisition techniques (dry suction, wet suction, slow pull) and 1 of 2 22G FNB needle designs. The primary outcome was specimen cellularity. Secondary outcomes included blood contamination and number of passes needed for diagnosis.

RESULTS

A total of 52 (35.3%), 49 (33.3%) and 46 (31.3%) specimens were obtained with slow pull, dry suction and wet suction, respectively. A total of 56 (38%) and 91 (62%) specimens were obtained with each needle, respectively. No difference in cellularity scores was identified by technique (3.28 vs 3.55 vs 2.94; p = 0.081) or needle type (3.45 vs 3.15; p = 0.19). The same was true for blood contamination and diagnostic pass. A diagnosis was reached after 3 passes in 51 patients (93%). Histological diagnosis was possible in 45 specimens (82%). No severe adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Cellularity of pancreatic specimens obtained with FNB needles via EUS was not influenced by technique and needle design. Three passes were enough to obtain a histological diagnosis in most patients. Larger clinical trials are required to validate the results of this study.

Comparison of specimen quality among the standard suction, slow-pull, and wet suction techniques for EUS-FNA: A multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial

Background and Objectives

Standard suction technique (SST), slow-pull technique (SPT), and wet suction technique (WEST) of EUS-FNA are designed to improve the diagnostic yields of solid and solid-cystic lesions. We conducted a multicenter, prospective, randomized crossover trial to compare SST, SPT, and WEST on specimen quality and diagnostic accuracy using a 22G needle.

Methods

Patients with solid or solid-cystic lesions referred for EUS-FNA at four tertiary hospitals from December 2017 to August 2019 were considered eligible. All lesions were sampled using a 22G needle by the three techniques performed consecutively in a randomized order. The primary outcome was quality of the specimen acquired by each technique regarding blood contamination, tissue integrity and cellularity for diagnosis, graded on a predefined scale. The secondary outcomes were the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA and the incidence of adverse events. ClinicalTrial. gov registration number: NCT03567863.

Results

A total of 300 patients (mean age, 60.6 years, 188 men) were enrolled. WEST was superior (mean score 4.02 ± 1.51) over SST (3.67 ± 1.57, P = 0.018), but comparable to SPT (3.83 ± 1.55, P = 0.370) in overall specimen quality evaluation. WEST produced better tissue integrity (1.42 ± 0.74) and higher cellularity (1.32 ± 0.80) than SST and SPT. SPT (1.43 ± 0.69) was superior to SST (1.27 ± 0.72, P = 0.004) and WEST (1.28 ± 0.71, P = 0.006) in avoiding blood contamination. WEST achieved a diagnostic accuracy of 74.7%, higher than SST (64.4%, P = 0.007) and SPT (65.0%, P = 0.012). One bleeding event occurred with a pancreatic lesion.

Conclusions

WEST was comparable to SPT and superior to SST in the overall quality of the specimen and achieved highest diagnostic yield.

The Role of Endoscopic Ultrasonography in the Diagnosis and Staging of Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death and the second gastrointestinal cancer-related death in the United States. Early detection and accurate diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancer are paramount in guiding treatment plans, as surgical resection can provide the only potential cure for this disease. The overall prognosis of pancreatic cancer is poor even in patients with resectable disease. The 5-year survival after surgical resection is ~10% in node-positive disease compared to ~30% in node-negative disease. The advancement of imaging studies and the multidisciplinary approach involving radiologists, gastroenterologists, advanced endoscopists, medical, radiation, and surgical oncologists have a major impact on the management of pancreatic cancer. Endoscopic ultrasonography is essential in the diagnosis by obtaining tissue (FNA or FNB) and in the loco-regional staging of the disease. The advancement in EUS techniques has made this modality a critical adjunct in the management process of pancreatic cancer. In this review article, we provide an overall description of the role of endoscopic ultrasonography in the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancer.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic sampling for the histopathological diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis

Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP), which is characterized by pancreatic enlargement and irregular narrowing of the main pancreatic duct, is difficult to differentiate from malignancy. The irregular narrowing of the pancreatic duct, which can be detected via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, is a characteristic feature of AIP; however, distinguishing between localized AIP and pancreatic cancer based on pancreatic duct imaging is difficult. This study overviews the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided pancreatic sampling for the histopathological diagnosis of AIP. Recent enhancements in needle biopsy methodologies and technologies have contributed to improvement in the diagnostic efficacy of this technique. The guidance provided in this study for the histological diagnosis of AIP is anticipated to further advance in the histopathological diagnosis of AIP using EUS-guided pancreatic sampling.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions: just wet it

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is the main method for acquisition of tissue from gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions (SELs). Despite the development of new needles, diagnostic yield remains low. A new method of aspiration has been described, where the needle is filled with saline [wet-suction technique (WST)], with promising results in pancreatic lesions. This method has not been tested in SELs.

AIMS AND METHODS

Prospective single center study to assess the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA+WST in the diagnosis of SELs, without the use of rapid on-site evaluation. In mesenchymal tumors, the diagnosis was considered positive only when immunohistochemistry could differentiate between gastrointestinal stromal tumor and leiomyoma.

RESULTS

Eighty-seven patients with SELs were included (55% male, mean age 66 years). Mean SEL size was 25 mm (min 10 mm, max 120 mm), mean number of passes was 3 (±0.8). A 22G needle was used in 72 patients (83%), 19G in 10 (12%) and 25G in 5 (6%). We obtained a conclusive cytopathological diagnosis in 74 cases (diagnostic yield of 85%) and immunohistochemistry was performed in 70 cases (81%). The most frequent diagnoses were gastrointestinal stromal tumor (n = 34, 37%), leiomyoma (n = 13, 15%) and metastases (n = 10, 11%).

CONCLUSION

Wet suction technique allowed an excellent diagnostic yield in the EUS-guided evaluation of SELs. We suggest that, after proper replication of these results, WST may become the first-line method in the management of these lesions.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy: needle types and suction methods

Video 1Tools and techniques: understanding EUS-guided liver biopsy needle types and tissue acquisition techniques.

Usefulness of a Fork-Tip Needle in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy for Gastric Subepithelial Lesions

The sample adequacy and diagnostic accuracy of an endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for gastric subepithelial lesions (SELs) have been reported to be imperfect. To resolve these issues, a fork-tip needle as an EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle has been developed. This study was conducted to evaluate the usefulness of a fork-tip needle in an EUS-FNB for gastric SELs. Seventy-nine patients who received an EUS-FNA or FNB using a fork-tip needle for gastric SELs were included in the study. The sample adequacy and diagnostic accuracy were compared between the EUS-FNB with the fork-tip needle group (fork-tip group, n = 13) and the EUS-FNA with FNA needle group (FNA group, n = 66). In addition, a multivariate analysis of the factors influencing diagnostic accuracy was conducted. Regarding sample adequacy, there was no significant difference between the groups (100% vs. 90.9%, respectively; p = 0.582). The diagnostic accuracy of the fork-tip group was numerically higher than that of the FNA group (92.3% vs. 81.8%, respectively; p = 0.682). In a multivariate analysis, the diagnostic accuracy was related to the tumor size and location of the SEL but not to the needle type. In conclusion, this study does not show statistical superiority, but suggests the useful potential of a fork-tip needle.

A Meta-analysis of Slow Pull versus Suction for Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition

Background/Aims

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition is widely utilized as a diagnostic modality for intra-abdominal masses, but there remains debate regarding which suction technique, slow pull (SP) or conventional suction (CS), is better. A meta-analysis of reported studies was conducted to compare the diagnostic yields of SP and CS during EUS-guided tissue acquisition.

Methods

We conducted a systematic electronic search using MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify clinical studies comparing SP and CS. We meta-analyzed accuracy, sensitivity, blood contamination and cellularity using the random-effects model.

Results

A total of 17 studies (seven randomized controlled trials, four prospective studies, and six retrospective studies) with 1,616 cases were included in the analysis. Compared to CS, there was a trend toward better accuracy (odds ratio [OR], 1.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97 to 2.27; p=0.07) and sensitivity (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 0.95 to 2.93; p=0.08) with SP and a significantly lower rate of blood contamination (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.69; p<0.01). However, there was no significant difference in cellularity between SP and CS, with an OR of 1.28 (95% CI, 0.68 to 2.40; p=0.45). When the use of a 25-gauge needle was analyzed, the accuracy and sensitivity of SP were significantly better than those of CS, with ORs of 4.81 (95% CI, 1.99 to 11.62; p<0.01) and 4.69 (95% CI, 1.93 to 11.40; p<0.01), respectively.

Conclusions

Compared to CS, SP appears to provide better accuracy and sensitivity in EUS-guided tissue acquisition, especially when a 25-gauge needle is used.

Wet- versus dry-suction techniques for EUS-FNA of solid lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The optimal sampling techniques for EUS-FNA remain unclear and have not been standardized. To improve diagnostic accuracy, suction techniques for EUS-FNA have been developed and are widely used among endoscopists. The aim of this study was to compare wet-suction and dry-suction EUS-FNA techniques for sampling solid lesions. We performed a comprehensive literature search of major databases (from inception to June 2020) to identify prospective studies comparing wet-suction EUS-FNA and dry-suction EUS-FNA. Specimen adequacy, sample contamination, and histologic accuracy were assessed by pooling data using a random-effects model expressed in terms of odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Six studies including a total of 418 patients (365 wet suction vs. 377 dry suction) were included in our final analysis. The study included a total of 535 lesions (332 pancreatic lesions and 203 nonpancreatic lesions). The pooled odds of sample adequacy was 3.18 (CI: 1.82-5.54, P = 0.001) comparing wet- and dry-suction cohorts. The pooled odds of blood contamination was 1.18 (CI: 0.75-1.86, P = 0.1). The pooled rate for blood contamination was 58.33% (CI: 53.65%-62.90%) in the wet-suction cohort and 54.60% (CI 49.90%- 59.24%) in the dry-suction cohort (P = 0.256). The pooled odds of histological diagnosis was 3.68 (CI 0.82-16.42, P = 0.1). Very few adverse events were observed and did not have an impact on patient outcomes using either method. EUS-FNA using the wet-suction technique offers higher specimen quality through comparable rates of blood contamination and histological accuracy compared to dry-suction EUS-FNA.

Comparison between modified wet suction and dry suction technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy in pancreatic solid lesions

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Although endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy is widely applied, there is no clear consensus on the optimal biopsy technique. We described a modified wet suction technique (MWEST) with the aim to compare the efficacy and safety between MWEST and the dry suction technique (DST).

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized, crossover, single-blinded study, patients with suspected pancreatic malignancy were randomized to the DST (group A) or MWEST (group B) for the first pass, and the two techniques were performed alternately. The primary outcome was the comparison of specimen adequacy and diagnostic yield between the techniques. Secondary outcomes included the macroscopic visible core length, blood contamination of specimens, and adverse events of both techniques.

RESULTS

From January 2019 to September 2019, 216 passes were performed in 50 patients. The specimen adequacy was significantly higher in "per-lesion" (P = 0.026), "per-pass" (cytology: P = 0.034; histology: P = 0.042), and first-pass analysis (P = 0.034) for MWEST than for DST. In diagnostic yield, MWEST showed significantly superior histological yield (P = 0.014) and first-pass analysis (κ: MWEST: 0.743 and DST: 0.519) compared with DST. The median macroscopic visible core lengths were 8 mm (interquartile range: 3.25-15 mm) and 10 mm (interquartile range: 5.25-15 mm) for DST and MWEST, respectively (P = 0.036). Blood contamination was significantly more serious in DST than in MWEST (cytology: P = 0.021; histology: P = 0.042).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy with MWEST resulted in significantly better quality of specimen, histological, and first-pass diagnostic yields and comparable safety compared with the DST. MWEST is preferred for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy in pancreatic solid lesions.

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

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

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.

A prospective, head-to-head comparison of 2 EUS-guided liver biopsy needles in vivo

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Procedural standardization in endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) is necessary to obtain core biopsy specimens for accurate diagnosis. The objective of this study was to directly compare the diagnostic yield of 2 EUS-LB fine-needle biopsy (FNB) systems in vivo.

METHODS

In this prospective, single-center study, 108 adult patients undergoing EUS-LB over a 1-year period were included. Each EUS-LB consisted of an EGD, followed by EUS-guided biopsy of the left lobe of the liver sequentially using 2 different 19-gauge needles: the fork-tip (SharkCore) and Franseen (Acquire) FNB systems. Specimens were then reviewed by a GI histopathologist to determine diagnostic adequacy as well as the number of complete portal tracts, specimen length, and degree of fragmentation.

RESULTS

In 79.4% of cases, the fork-tip FNB system yielded a final diagnosis compared with 97.2% of the Franseen FNB specimens (P < .001). The mean number of complete portal tracts in the fork-tip FNB samples was 7.07 compared with 9.59 in the Franseen FNB samples (P < .001). The mean specimen length was 13.86 mm for the fork-tip FNB and 15.81 mm for the Franseen FNB (P = .004). Cores were intact in 47.6% of the fork-tip FNB samples and in 75.2% of the Franseen FNB samples (P = .004).

CONCLUSIONS

In EUS-LB, we found that the 19-gauge Franseen FNB system resulted in a statistically significant increase in diagnostic adequacy compared with biopsy using the fork-tip FNB system.

Cytologic Assessment of Cystic/Intraductal Lesions of the Pancreatobiliary Tract

CONTEXT.—

Because of new and improved imaging techniques, cystic/intraductal pancreatobiliary tract lesions are increasingly being discovered, and brushings or endoscopic ultrasound/computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsies from these lesions have become an integral part of pathologists' daily practice. Because patient management has become increasingly conservative, accurate preoperative diagnosis is critical. Cytologic distinction of low-risk (pseudocysts, serous cystadenoma, lymphoepithelial cysts, and squamoid cysts of the pancreatic duct) from high-risk pancreatic cysts (intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm and mucinous cystic neoplasm) requires incorporation of clinical, radiologic, and cytologic findings, in conjunction with chemical and molecular analysis of cyst fluid. Cytopathologists must ensure appropriate specimen triage, along with cytologic interpretation, cyst classification, and even grading of some (mucinous) cysts. Epithelial atypia in mucinous cysts (intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm and mucinous cystic neoplasm) has transitioned from a 3-tiered to a 2-tiered classification system, and intraductal oncocytic papillary neoplasms and intraductal tubulopapillary neoplasms have been separately reclassified because of their distinctive clinicopathologic characteristics. Because these lesions may be sampled on brushing or fine-needle aspiration biopsy, knowledge of their cytomorphology is critical.

OBJECTIVE.—

To use an integrated, multidisciplinary approach for the evaluation of cystic/intraductal pancreatobiliary tract lesions (incorporating clinical, radiologic, and cytologic findings with [chemical/molecular] cyst fluid analysis and ancillary stains) for definitive diagnosis and classification.

DATA SOURCES.—

Review of current literature on the cytopathology of cystic/intraductal pancreatobiliary tract lesions.

CONCLUSIONS.—

Our knowledge/understanding of recent updates in cystic/intraductal pancreatobiliary lesions can ensure that cytopathologists appropriately triage specimens, judiciously use and interpret ancillary studies, and incorporate the studies into reporting.

Challenges of ICC and FISH in the Field of Targeted Therapies from Cell Block to Smears

In the era of personalized medicine, there is an increasing demand for comprehensive and complex diagnosis using minimally invasive techniques. Nowadays, it is mandatory to integrate biomarkers in the diagnostic process, as well as in the treatment and clinical management of many cancer patients. Patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), for instance, are frequently diagnosed in advanced stages, at a point when only cytological material or small biopsies can be obtained. This pathology constitutes an interesting challenge for the testing of biomarkers in cytology. Furthermore, there is a growing development of imaging techniques that guide non-invasive approaches to obtain small biopsies or cytological samples. This has allowed fine needle aspiration cytology and fine needle aspiration biopsy (FNAC, FNAB) to become front-line procedures in the management of patients with NSCLC. It is well known that the list of biomarkers to be tested in these patients continues to increase. Nevertheless, there are several of essential biomarkers that should always be analyzed in all patients with NSCLC, not only in non-squamous but also in some squamous carcinomas (SqCC). Some of them, such as PDL1, are tested by immunocytochemistry (ICC), while others, mainly ALK and ROS1, can be tested by ICC and confirmed using other techniques such a Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization (FISH). Other biomarkers, namely EGFR and BRAF mutations, are currently evaluated by polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based techniques including Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS). In this review, we will address the particularities and challenges that ICC and FISH pose in different types of cytological samples from an eminently practical point of view.

A Pilot Randomized Crossover Trial of Wet Suction and Conventional Techniques of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration for Upper Gastrointestinal Subepithelial Lesions

Methods

Twenty-six patients with UGI-SELs indicated for EUS-FNA were randomly assigned to the dry-first arm using the dry technique for the first two passes or the wet-first arm using the wet technique for the first two passes using a cross-over design with a ratio of 1 : 1. The primary endpoint was the cellularity score of the EUS-FNA specimens rated on a 4-point scale (0-3). The secondary endpoints were the factors influencing cellularity in each suction technique.

Results

The mean cellularity score was 1.65 ± 1.20 for the wet technique and 2.00 ± 0.98 for the dry technique (p = 0.068). Logistic regression analysis showed that higher cellularity may be related to the final diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors in the dry technique and the SEL location in the upper stomach in the wet technique.

Conclusion

The wet EUS-FNA technique failed to show a potential for improved cellularity of specimens compared to the dry technique for UGI-SELs.

Mediastinal granular cell tumor diagnosed with endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration via a modified technique based on wet suction: A case report and literature review

Granular cell tumor (GCT) represents a less frequently seen tumor originating from Schwann cells. Although GCT develops in various locations in the human body, GCT of the mediastinum is extremely uncommon. A case of mediastinal GCT diagnosed by aspiration using a fine needle assisted by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS-FNA) via a modified technique based on wet suction was reported. An asymptomatic 28-year-old man was referred for assessment of a mass in the mediastinum that was found incidentally via chest computed tomography (CT) at health screening. EUS demonstrated a hypoechoic lesion with a distinct boundary, which was derived from the upper posterior mediastinum and partly located close to the posterior wall of the esophagus. Therefore, EUS-FNA with a modified wet suction technique was performed to harvest adequate specimens for the diagnosis of GCT. Minimally invasive tumor removal was performed, and histological examination of the specimen harvested surgically verified GCT, consistent with histological findings of the specimen obtained by EUS-FNA. The case highlights that a good accuracy of histological diagnosis and specimen quality are achieved for the modified wet-suction technique in EUS-FNA, and a preoperative diagnosis of mediastinal GCT can be made with certainty.

The Diagnosis of Autoimmune Pancreatitis Using Endoscopic Ultrasonography

Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is characterized by enlargement of the pancreas and irregular narrowing of the main pancreatic duct. It is often associated with IgG4-related sclerosing cholangitis (IgG4-SC), in which the bile duct narrows. Although characteristic irregular narrowing of the pancreatic duct caused by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is noted in AIP, it is difficult to differentiate between localized AIP and pancreatic carcinoma based on imaging of the pancreatic duct. While stenosis of the bile duct in IgG4-SC is characterized by longer-length stenosis than in cholangiocarcinoma, differentiation based on bile duct imaging alone is challenging. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) can characterize hypoechoic enlargement of the pancreas or bile duct wall thickening in AIP and IgG4-SC, and diagnosis using elastography and contrast-enhanced EUS are being evaluated. The utility of EUS-guided fine needle aspiration for the histological diagnosis of AIP has been reported and is expected to improve diagnostic performance for AIP. Findings in the bile duct wall from endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography followed by intraductal ultrasonography are useful in differentiating IgG4-SC from cholangiocarcinoma. Diagnoses based on endoscopic ultrasonography play a central role in the diagnosis of AIP.

Wet- versus dry-suction techniques for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of solid lesions: a multicenter randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The optimal sampling techniques for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) remain unclear and have not been standardized. The aim of this study was to compare the wet-suction and dry-suction techniques for sampling solid lesions in the pancreas, mediastinum, and abdomen.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, crossover, randomized controlled trial with randomized order of sampling techniques. The 296 consecutive patients underwent EUS-FNA with 22G needles and were randomized in a ratio of 1:1 into two separate groups that received the dry-suction and wet-suction techniques in a different order. The primary outcome was to compare the histological diagnostic accuracy of dry suction and wet suction for malignancy. The secondary outcomes were to compare the cytological diagnostic accuracy and specimen quality.

RESULTS

Among the 269 patients with pancreatic (n = 161) and non-pancreatic (n = 108) lesions analyzed, the wet-suction technique had a significantly better histological diagnostic accuracy (84.9 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 79.9 % - 89.0 %] vs. 73.2 % [95 %CI 67.1 % - 78.7 %]; P = 0.001), higher specimen adequacy (94.8 % vs. 78.8 %; P < 0.001), and less blood contamination (P < 0.001) than the dry-suction technique. In addition, sampling non-pancreatic lesions with two passes of wet suction provided a histological diagnostic accuracy of 91.6 %.

CONCLUSIONS

The wet-suction technique in EUS-FNA generates better histological diagnostic accuracy and specimen quality than the dry-suction technique. Furthermore, sampling non-pancreatic lesions with two passes of EUS-FNA with wet suction may provide a definitive histological diagnosis when rapid on-site evaluation is not routinely available.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) with Image Enhancement

Although endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is useful in the differential diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions, lymph nodes, and liver lesions, inadequate sampling may result in an incorrect pathological diagnosis. The accuracy of EUS for the evaluation of pancreatobiliary lesions may be increased by image enhancement technologies, including contrast-enhanced harmonic (CH)-EUS and EUS-elastography. These methods can provide information that complement EUS-FNA for the diagnosis and staging of pancreatobiliary cancer, and can help to identify the EUS-FNA target, reducing the requirement for repeat FNA.

Tissue acquisition and pancreatic masses: Which needle and which acquisition technique should be used?

Background and study aims  Pancreatic cancer represents the fourth most common cause of cancer-related deaths in Western countries and the need of a low-risk investigation to obtain an accurate histopathological diagnosis has become increasingly pressing. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) with fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is the standard method for obtaining samples from pancreatic masses. In recent years, there has been an increasing need to obtain histological specimens during EUS procedures, rather than cytological ones, to guide oncological treatment options, leading to the so-call "FNB concept." Different needles have been developed for fine-needle biopsy (FNB) in recent years, enabling acquisition of larger specimens on which to perform histological and molecular analyses. The aim of this narrative review was to assess the role of EUS-guided FNA and FNB in patients with pancreatic masses, and to identify which needle and which acquisition technique should be used to improve tissue acquisition.

Diagnostic efficacy of three suction techniques for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions: protocol for a multicenter randomized cross-over clinical trial

BACKGROUND

How suction technique affects endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) remains unclear. A standardized protocol is currently lacking, with most previous studies being restricted to EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). The research related to EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) is sparse.

AIMS

The aim of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy, cellularity, tissue acquisition, blood contamination and adverse event rate of three common suction techniques (standard suction, slow-pull, and wet suction) used for EUS-FNB of solid pancreatic masses.

METHODS

This is a multicenter single-blind randomized cross-over superiority trial. A total of 300 patients with suspected pancreatic malignancy will be enrolled from digestive endoscopic centers at five large tertiary hospitals in China. All three suction techniques will be performed on each patient using a 25G ProCore needle, with the sequence of suction techniques determined by randomization. Cytological and histological specimens obtained with each of the three techniques will be assessed independently. Outcomes among the three suction techniques will be compared.

DISCUSSION

To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest multicenter randomized cross-over trial designed to determine the optimal suction technique for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses. This study may contribute to standardizing the suction technique for EUS-FNB.

Comparison of smear cytology and liquid-based cytology in EUS-guided FNA of pancreatic lesions: experience from a large tertiary center

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Studies comparing the diagnostic efficacy of liquid-based cytology (LBC) and smear cytology (SC) of pancreatic tissue sampling obtained via EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) are still insufficient, mainly because results were controversial. We compared the diagnostic efficiency of LBC and SC of EUS-FNA of pancreatic lesions in one of the largest tertiary hospitals in China.

METHODS

A retrospective database search (January 2015 to January 2019) was performed for patients who underwent EUS-FNA with both LBC and SC. Demographic, cytologic, and endosonographic data were collected from 819 patients; 514 cases met the inclusion criteria. Diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were compared. Rapid on-site evaluation was not available in all cases.

RESULTS

Three hundred eighty-five cases (74.90%) had confirmed malignancy, and 40 cases (7.78%) confirmed benign neoplasm. Adequate tissue sampling rates showed no significant difference between the 2 groups. The sensitivity, accuracy, and negative predictive value (NPV) of LBC were higher than those of SC with statistical significance (71.4% vs 55.1%, 76.1% vs 61.6%, and 40.6% vs 27.7%, respectively). The sensitivity, accuracy, and NPV of combined SC and LBC were higher than those of LBC alone with statistical significance (83.9% vs 71.4%, 86.5% vs 76.1%, and 56.8% vs 40.6%, respectively). Multivariate analysis revealed that pancreatic neck/body/tail lesions (P = .003), solid lesions (P < .001), 22-gauge needle size (P < .001), and number of needle passage >3 (P = .041) were associated with higher diagnostic sensitivity in all participants using LBC, whereas number of needle passage >3 (P = .017) was associated with higher diagnostic sensitivity using SC.

CONCLUSIONS

LBC was more accurate and sensitive than SC in EUS-FNA of pancreatic lesions with higher NPV when rapid on-site evaluation is unavailable. Pancreatic neck/body/tail lesions, solid lesions, 22-gauge needle, and more than 3 passes were associated with higher sensitivity when using LBC. Performing more than 3 passes is associated with higher sensitivity when using SC.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided liver biopsy: Recent evidence

Liver biopsy (LB) is an essential tool in diagnosing, evaluating and managing various diseases of the liver. As such, histopathological results are critical as they establish or aid in diagnosis, provide information on prognosis, and guide the appropriate selection of medical therapy for patients. Indications for LB include evaluation of persistent elevation of liver chemistries of unclear etiology, diagnosis of chronic liver diseases such as Wilson's disease, autoimmune hepatitis, small duct primary sclerosing cholangitis, work up of fever of unknown origin, amyloidosis and more. Traditionally, methods of acquiring liver tissue have included percutaneous LB (PCLB), transjugular LB (TJLB) or biopsy taken surgically via laparotomy or laparoscopy. However, traditional methods of LB may be inferior to newer methods. Additionally, PCLB and TJLB carry higher risks of adverse events and complications. More recently, endoscopic ultrasound guided LB (EUS-LB) has evolved as an alternative method of tissue sampling that has proven to be safe and effective, with limited adverse events. Compared to PC and TJ routes, EUS-LB may also have a greater diagnostic yield of tissue, be superior for a targeted approach of focal lesions, provide higher quality images and allow for greater patient comfort. These advantages have contributed to the increased use of EUS-LB as a technique for obtaining liver tissue. Herein, we provide a review of the recent evidence of EUS-LB for liver disease.