Prospective evaluation of adverse events following lower gastrointestinal tract EUS FNA

Beyond boundaries: Feasibility of curved linear array echoendoscope in appendiceal neoplasm detection

We recently read with great interest a study by Zhang et al in the World Journal of Gastroenterology. In our practice, we focus specifically on examining appendiceal mucinous neoplasms (AMNs) with endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) using different scopes. AMNs are rare neoplastic lesions characterized by an accumulation of mucin inside a cystic dilatation of the appendix. Clinically, they can present as nonspecific acute appendicitis. AMNs can turn into a life-threatening condition, termed pseudomyxoma peritonei, in which the ruptured appendix causes accumulation of mucin in the abdomen. Therefore, accurate and rapid diagnosis of AMN is essential. EUS is able to confirm and stage AMNs; although, EUS examination was once limited to the rectal and anal regions due to the conventional oblique-view scopes. With the emergence of new forward-view linear echoendoscopes and instruments like EUS miniprobes and overtubes, the scope of examination is changing. Herein, we discuss the feasibility of using the curved linear array echoendoscopes to examine cecal and appendiceal orifice lesions.

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.

Diagnosis by Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Sampling through the Lower Gastrointestinal Tract

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration/biopsy (EUS-FNA/FNB) is very safe and has a high diagnostic rate for upper gastrointestinal lesions, especially pancreatic lesions, but its application in the lower gastrointestinal tract has rarely been reported. Due to the tortuous course of the colorectum, with the sigmoid colon particularly prone to perforation, most endoscopists are reluctant to perform lateral-sector endoscopic ultrasound scanning without a water-bag protection for the puncture. The ultrasonic endoscopy and flexible puncture needle techniques recently introduced into clinical practice have made ultrasound-guided puncture safer and more convenient. In addition, endoscopists have carefully tested various protective measures to improve the safety of the lower gastrointestinal puncture, substantially increasing its clinical feasibility. In this article, we review the iterations of endoscopic ultrasound equipment introduced in recent years and the many ingenious ideas proposed by endoscopists regarding lower gastrointestinal puncture.

EUS of a submucosal lesion at the appendiceal orifice using a double-balloon endoluminal intervention platform

Video 1Video demonstrating the use of a DEIP to facilitate both radial and linear EUS in the proximal colon.

Metastatic undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma diagnosed by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration

Pathological differentiation is important for suspected lesions of metastatic undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS) because no reliable imaging criteria exist for this entity yet. In the present case, transgastric endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for the pancreatic tumor and transcolonic EUS-FNA for the intraabdominal tumor contributed to the definitive diagnosis of metastatic UPS, leading to appropriate treatment selection.

A Transanal Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine-needle Aspiration Biopsy for an Intrapelvic Tumor Diagnosed as Recurrence of a Smooth Muscle Tumor of Uncertain Malignant Potential Following Uterine Morcellation

A transoral endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNAB) is a well-established tissue-sampling method. However, performing a transanal EUS-FNAB remains challenging. Uterine morcellation has emerged as a minimally invasive approach for benign tumor treatment. However, uterine myomas are heterogeneous and include malignant and indeterminate malignant cells. We herein report a rare case of intrapelvic tumor diagnosed by a transanal EUS-FNAB as a recurrence of smooth muscle tumors of uncertain malignant potential following uterine morcellation. Physicians should be aware that a previous uterine myoma resected under morcellation has the possibility of intra-abdominal recurrence. A transanal EUS-FNAB is a practical option for making a pathological diagnosis.

Adverse events of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for histologic diagnosis in Japanese tertiary centers: Multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is used for the histopathological diagnosis of any type of gastrointestinal disease. Few adverse events are experienced with this procedure; however, the actual rate of adverse events remains unclear. This study aimed to clarify the current status of cases that experienced adverse events related to the EUS-FNA procedure used for histopathologic diagnoses.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of cases with EUS-FNA-related adverse events in Japanese tertiary centers was conducted by assessing the following clinical data: basic case information, FNA technique, type of procedural adverse events, and prognosis.

RESULTS

Of the 13,566 EUS-FNA cases overall, the total number of cases in which adverse events related to EUS-FNA occurred was 234. The incidence of EUS-FNA-related adverse events was ~1.7%. Bleeding and pancreatitis cases accounted for ~49.1% and 26.5% of all adverse events, respectively. Bleeding was the most common adverse event with only seven cases requiring blood transfusion. In cases with neuroendocrine tumors, pancreatitis was the most frequent adverse event. Needle tract seeding because of EUS-FNA was observed during the follow-up period in only ~0.1% of cases with pancreatic cancer. There was no mortality because of adverse events caused by EUS-FNA.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed that the adverse events-related EUS-FNA for histopathologic diagnoses were not severe conditions, and had low incidence.

Risk of adverse events associated with upper and lower endoscopic ultrasound: a population-based cohort study

Background and study aim  Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) enables diagnostic evaluation and therapeutic interventions but is associated with adverse events. We conducted a population-based cohort study to determine the risk of adverse events for upper and lower EUS with and without fine-needle aspiration (FNA). Patients and methods  All adults who underwent EUS and resided in Calgary in 2007-2013 were included. Endoscopy and provincial databases were used to identify EUS procedures, unplanned emergency department visits, and hospital admissions within 30 days of the procedures, which were then characterized through formal chart review. Adverse events were defined a priori and classified as definitely, possibly, or not related to EUS. The primary outcome was 30-day risk of adverse events classified as definitely or possibly related to EUS. Univariable and multivariable analyses were conducted with risk factors known to be associated with EUS adverse events. Results  2895 patients underwent 3552 EUS procedures: 3034 (85 %) upper EUS, of which 710 (23 %) included FNA, and 518 (15 %) lower EUS, of which 23 (4 %) involved FNA. Overall, 69 procedures (2 %) involved an adverse event that was either definitely or possibly related to EUS, with 33 (1 %) requiring hospitalization. None of the adverse events required intensive care or resulted in death. On multivariable analysis, only FNA was associated with increased risk of adverse events (odds ratio 6.43, 95 % confidence interval 3.92-10.55; P  < 0.001). Conclusion  Upper and lower EUS were generally safe but FNA substantially increased the risk of adverse events. EUS-related complications requiring hospitalization were rare.

Complications of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration: A Narrative Review

Considerable progress has been made recently in the use of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) to diagnose intra-luminal gastrointestinal lesions and extra-luminal lesions near the gastrointestinal tract. Numerous reports have indicated that EUS-FNA has high diagnostic performance and safety, which has led to the routine use of EUS-FNA and an increasing number of cases. Thus, while EUS-FNA has a low rate of complications, endoscopists may encounter these complications as the number of cases increases. Infrequent reports have also described life-threatening complications. Therefore, endoscopists should possess a comprehensive understanding of the complications of EUS-FNA, which include hemorrhage, perforation, infection, and acute pancreatitis, as well as their management. This review examines the available evidence regarding the complications associated with EUS-FNA, and the findings will be useful for ensuring that endoscopists perform EUS-FNA safely and appropriately.

EUS and EUS-guided FNA/core biopsies in the evaluation of subepithelial lesions of the lower gastrointestinal tract: 10-year experience

Background and Objective:

The widespread use of colonoscopy has led to an increasing number of subepithelial lesions (SELs) being detected in the lower gastrointestinal (GI) tract. This study aimed to analyze the utility of EUS and its role in the management of lower GI SELs.

Patients and Methods:

Records of all patients who were referred for lower EUS evaluation of a SEL at a tertiary center between 2007 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed after IRB approval. Data collection included patient/lesion characteristics, technical details of procedure, and pathology results.

Results:

A total of 47 patients underwent EUS examinations for the evaluation of 49 suspected SEL in the lower GI tract (2 patients had 2 SELs each). Out of the 49 suspected lesions, the most frequent location was in the rectum (30/49, 61.2%). EUS showed extraluminal compression in 2 cases (2/49, 4.1%) and intraluminal lesions were identified in 40 cases (40/49, 81.6%). In 7 patients (7/49, 14.3%), no lesion could be identified by EUS. Twenty (20/49, 40.8%) SELs were malignant or had malignant potential. Twenty-six EUS-guided fine-needle aspirations (FNAs) and 14 EUS-core biopsies were performed. EUS-FNA alone was able to correctly diagnose 15/26 (57.7%) of the lower SELs. When EUS-guided fine needle biopsies (FNB) were performed during the same procedure, the final diagnosis was confirmed in 21/26 (80.8%) cases. There was only one procedure-related complication caused by use of narcotics.

Conclusion:

EUS-guided FNA/FNB are feasible and safe techniques for assessing lower GI SELs and provide valuable information regarding lesion characteristics and their malignant potential with high diagnostic accuracy.

Rectal ultrasound with fine needle aspiration: an underutilized modality for delineating and diagnosing perirectal, presacral, and pelvic lesions

Background and study aims  The merits of rectal ultrasound for rectal cancer staging are well documented. Conventional approaches to accessing perirectal and presacral lesions entail computed tomography guidance via a transgluteal approach or frank surgical exploration. We report on the safety and efficacy of performing rectal ultrasound with fine-needle aspiration (RUS-FNA) for evaluating perirectal, presacral, and pelvic abnormalities. Patients and methods  Patients who underwent RUS-FNA of perirectal, presacral, or pelvic lesions between August 2005 and September 2016 were identified using an institutional database. Subjects were all individuals treated at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States. Patient demographics and imaging characteristics were noted. Procedural details included lesion size, location, echo appearance, and technical information. Patients were given antibiotics prior to FNA attempt and for 3 days after. Diagnostic yield, clinical utility, and complications were noted. Results  Twenty-seven patients met criteria during the specified study time period. The cohort consisted of 12 males (44.4 %) and 15 females (55.5 %). RUS-FNA was diagnostic in 24 patients (88.8 %) and obviated the need for surgery in 14 patients (51.9 %). There were four complications (14.8 %): two perirectal and two presacral abscesses. Conclusion  While the diagnostic yield of RUS-FNA is high and the potential to affect clinical decision-making is substantial, risk of complication is not negligible. RUS-FNA should only be performed if the result will substantially alter clinical management, and the decision to perform RUS-FNA should be made with close consultation between the endosonographer, surgeon, and/or medical or radiation oncologist.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided FNA of pelvic lesions: A large single-center experience

BACKGROUND

Pelvic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (PEUS-FNA) of rectal or perirectal lesions is safe, minimally invasive, and well tolerated. It provides valuable information, which can greatly influence patient management. Herein, the authors present what to their knowledge is the largest series to date of PEUS-FNA.

METHODS

PEUS-FNA specimens were retrieved from the archives of the study institution from January 2001 to March 2015. Only patients with solid pelvic lesions were examined. The cytopathology findings, immunohistochemistry, corresponding histology, and clinical data were collected. For analysis of accuracy, atypical or suspicious results were classified as "negative." The sensitivity and specificity of PEUS-FNA were calculated in a subset of patients with available surgical pathology.

RESULTS

A total of 127 cases meeting the current study criteria were obtained from patients who underwent PEUS-FNA at the study institution between January 2001 and March 2015. The mean age of the patients was 60 years, and 53% were female. Pelvic lesions were comprised of 72% masses and 28% lymph nodes, with a mean mass diameter of 27.38 mm (range, 5-100 mm). PEUS-FNA was positive for malignancy in 45% of cases, atypical/suspicious in 4.7% of cases, and negative for malignancy in 50.3% of cases. Surgical pathology was available for 44 patients. PEUS-FNA demonstrated 89.3% sensitivity, 100% specificity, a diagnostic accuracy of 93.2%, a positive predictive value of 100%, and a negative predictive value of 84.2%. No complications were noted.

CONCLUSIONS

PEUS-FNA is safe and effective for the investigation of pelvic lesions. Cancer Cytopathol 2016;124:836-41. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

The clinical usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration and biopsy for rectal and perirectal lesions

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration and/or biopsy (EUS-FNA/B) have been used to diagnose subepithelial tumors (SETs) and extraluminal lesions in the gastrointestinal tract. Our group previously reported the usefulness of EUS-FNA/B for rectal and perirectal lesions. This study reports our expanded experience with EUS-FNA/B for rectal and perirectal lesions in terms of diagnostic accuracy and safety. We also included our new experience with EUS-FNB using the recently introduced ProCore needle.

METHODS

From April 2009 to March 2014, EUS-FNA/B for rectal and perirectal lesions was performed in 30 consecutive patients. We evaluated EUS-FNA/B performance by comparing histological diagnoses with final results. We also investigated factors affecting diagnostic accuracy.

RESULTS

Among 10 patients with SETs, EUS-FNA/B specimen results revealed a gastrointestinal stromal tumor in 4 patients and malignant lymphoma in 1 patient. The diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA/B was 50% for SETs (5/10). Among 20 patients with non-SET lesions, 8 patients were diagnosed with malignant disease and 7 were diagnosed with benign disease based on both EUS-FNA/B and the final results. The diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA/B for non-SET lesions was 75% (15/20). The size of lesions was the only factor related to diagnostic accuracy (P=0.027). Two complications of mild fever and asymptomatic pneumoperitoneum occurred after EUS-FNA/B.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA/B for rectal and perirectal lesions was 67% (20/30). EUS-FNA/B is a clinically useful method for cytological and histological diagnoses of rectal and perirectal lesions.