The Use of a Stylet in Endoscopic Ultrasound With Fine-Needle Aspiration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy using macroscopic on-site evaluation technique reduces the number passes yet maintains a high diagnostic accuracy: A randomized study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Although rapid on-site cytological evaluation (ROSE) for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) may increase diagnostic yield, it is not widely available. Macroscopic on-site evaluation (MOSE) is an alternative modality although it is not standardized for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (FNB). We evaluated diagnostic performance of MOSE compared with conventional technique of EUS-TA using core biopsy needle.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing EUS-FNA for solid lesions were randomized to MOSE or conventional arms. The primary and secondary outcome measures were diagnostic accuracy, diagnostic yield, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and the number of passes, respectively. The optimum parameters for macroscopic visible core (MVC, i.e., length, number) by MOSE to achieve accurate diagnosis were evaluated.

RESULTS

Ninety-six patients (48 conventional and 48 MOSE) were enrolled. Mean lesion size was larger in MOSE arm (32.67 ± 7.22 vs 29.31 ± 6.98 mm, P = 0.023). Diagnostic accuracy (95.8% vs 91.6%), diagnostic yield (97.9% vs 95.8%), procedure duration, and adverse events of the two methods were similar. Median number of passes with MOSE was less (2 vs 3 P = 0.000). Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve showed that with MOSE, obtaining a total MVC length of 11.5 mm had 93.3% sensitivity, and 2.5 MVC cores (each 4 mm) had 86.7% sensitivity for malignancy diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-FNB with MOSE, a simple reliable technique, can achieve a high and comparable diagnostic accuracy with lesser number of passes. Obtaining longer length and greater number of MVC increase the sensitivity to diagnose malignancy with MOSE.

Methods to increase the diagnostic efficiency of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for solid pancreatic lesions: An updated review

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is a means to procure adequate specimens for histological and cytologic analysis. The ideal EUS-FNA should be safe, accurate, and have a high sample adequacy rate and low adverse events rate. In recent years, many guidelines and trials on EUS-FNA have been published. The purpose of this article is to provide an update on the influence of some of the main factors on the diagnostic efficiency of EUS-FNA as well as a rare but serious complication known as needle tract seeding.

Body Composition and COPD: A New Perspective

The proportion of obese or overweight patients in COPD patients is increasing. Although BMI, WC and other easy to measure indicators have been proven to be related to the risk of COPD, they cannot accurately reflect the distribution and changes of body composition, ignoring the body composition (such as fat distribution, muscle content, water content, etc.), the relationship between it and disease risk may be missed. By analyzing the correlation between different body composition indexes and COPD patients, we can provide new research ideas for the prognosis judgment or intervention of COPD disease.

Contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration versus standard fine-needle aspiration in pancreatic masses: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

It is still unclear whether endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) contrast-enhanced fine-needle aspiration (CH-EUS-FNA) determines superior results in comparison to standard EUS-FNA in tissue acquisition of pancreatic masses. Aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the diagnostic outcomes of these two techniques.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed/Medline and Embase database through October 2020 and identified 6 studies, of which 2 randomized controlled trials (recruiting 701 patients). We performed pairwise meta-analysis through a random effects model and expressed data as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Pooled diagnostic sensitivity was 84.6% (95% CI 80.7%-88.6%) with CH-EUS-FNA and 75.3% (67%-83.5%) with EUS-FNA, with evidence of a significant superiority of the former (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.26-2.40; p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis confirmed the superiority of CH-EUS-FNA over EUS-FNA only in larger lesions. Pooled diagnostic accuracy was 88.8% (85.6%-91.9%) in CH-EUS-FNA group and 83.6% (79.4%-87.8%) in EUS-FNA group (OR 1.52, 1.01-2.31; p = 0.05). Pooled sample adequacy was 95.1% (91.1%-99.1%) with CH-EUS-FNA and 89.4% (81%-97.8%) with EUS-FNA (OR 2.40, 1.38-4.17; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

CH-EUS-FNA seems to be superior to standard EUS-FNA in patients with pancreatic masses. Further trials are needed to confirm these results.

Contrast-Enhanced Harmonic Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration versus Standard Fine-Needle Aspiration in Pancreatic Masses: A Propensity Score Analysis

Background: Whether endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) contrast-enhanced fine-needle aspiration (CH-EUS-FNA) determines superior results in comparison to standard EUS-FNA in tissue acquisition of pancreatic masses remains unclear. The aim of this study was to compare these two techniques on a series of patients with solid pancreatic lesions. Methods: 362 patients underwent EUS-FNA (2008–2019), after the propensity score matching of two groups were compared; 103 treated with CH-EUS-FNA (group 1) and 103 with standard EUS-FNA (group 2). The primary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy. Secondary outcomes were sensitivity, specificity, and sample adequacy. Results: Diagnostic sensitivity was 87.6% in group 1 and 80% in group 2 (p = 0.18). The negative predictive value was 56% in group 1 and 41.5% in group 2 (p = 0.06). The specificity and positive predictive values were 100% for both groups. Diagnostic accuracy was 89.3% and 82.5%, respectively (p = 0.40). Sample adequacy was 94.1% in group 1 and 91.2% in group 2 (p = 0.42). The rate of adequate core histologic samples was 33% and 28.1%, respectively (p = 0.44), and the number of needle passes to obtain adequate samples were 2.4 ± 0.6 and 2.7 ± 0.8, respectively (p = 0.76). These findings were confirmed in subgroup analyses, conducted according to lesion size and contrast enhancement pattern. Conclusions: CH-EUS-FNA does not appear to be superior to standard EUS-FNA in patients with pancreatic masses.

EUS tissue acquisition: From A to B

EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) has made rapid development since its introduction in the early 1990s. The technique is widely accepted and invaluable for staging and diagnosis of a variety of upper gastrointestinal and mediastinal lesions. Fine-needle aspiration (FNA) has long been the gold standard, but due to its limitations such as the inability to retain stroma and associated cellular architecture, novel biopsy needles (FNB) were designed. Overall, FNA and FNB needles perform seemingly equally in terms of diagnostic accuracy, however, the second-generation FNB needles require less passes. The third-generation FNB needles (crown-cut needle types) seem to be preferable to FNA needles as well as to the second-generation FNB needles, when larger histological specimens and preserved tissue architecture are required. EUS-TA is constantly under development, and new applications of this technique include tumor risk stratification according to its genetic profile as well as minimally invasive creation of patient-derived organoids, hallmarks of personized medicine. It remains yet to be shown, whether these applications will lead to a decisive shift from aspiration to biopsy, i.e., from A to B.

Comparative accuracy of needle sizes and designs for EUS tissue sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Variable diagnostic performance of sampling techniques during EUS-guided tissue acquisition of solid pancreatic masses based on needle type (FNA versus fine-needle biopsy [FNB]) and gauge (19-gauge vs 22-gauge vs 25-gauge) has been reported. We performed a systematic review with network meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided techniques for sampling solid pancreatic masses.

METHODS

Through a systematic literature review to November 2018, we identified 27 randomized controlled trials (2711 patients) involving adults undergoing EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses that evaluated the diagnostic performance of FNA and FNB needles based on needle gauge. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy. Secondary outcomes were sample adequacy, histologic core procurement rate, and number of needle passes. We performed pairwise and network meta-analyses and appraised the quality of evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology.

RESULTS

In the network meta-analysis, no specific EUS-guided tissue sampling technique was superior, based on needle type (FNA vs FNB) or gauge (19-gauge vs 22-gauge vs 25-gauge) (low-quality evidence). Specifically, there was no difference between 25-gauge FNA versus 22-gauge FNA (relative risk [RR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91-1.17) and 22-gauge FNB versus 22-gauge FNA (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.89-1.18) needles for diagnostic accuracy, sample adequacy, and histologic core procurement. Findings were confirmed in sensitivity analysis restricted to studies with no rapid on-site cytologic evaluation and no use of the fanning technique.

CONCLUSION

In a network meta-analysis, no specific EUS-guided tissue sampling technique was superior with regard to diagnostic accuracy, sample adequacy, or histologic procurement rate for solid pancreatic masses, with low confidence in estimates.

Comparison of the collection approaches of 2 large thyroid fine-needle aspiration practices reveals differing advantages for cytology and molecular testing adequacy rates

INTRODUCTION

At our institution, almost all thyroid fine-needle aspiration (FNA) procedures are performed by either Endocrinology or Radiology personnel. In this study, we compared the cytology and molecular adequacy rates of these 2 thyroid FNA practices, which differ on several aspects of specimen procurement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All thyroid FNA specimens from Endocrinology and Radiology practices between September 2008 and December 2016 were included. Over this time frame, the molecular testing modality transitioned from polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based (7-gene panel era) to next generation sequencing (NGS)-based (ThyroSeq era). In measuring cytology adequacy, the Bethesda System unsatisfactory rate was determined. Molecular adequacy was categorized as Optimal, Limited Thyroid Epithelial Cells, Limited Nucleic Acids, or Failed. These parameters were compared for the 2 practices.

RESULTS

The study cohorts comprised 5810 specimens from Endocrinology and 4597 from Radiology. More Endocrinology specimens were satisfactory for cytology diagnosis than those from Radiology (94.7% versus 90.0%, P < 0.001). For molecular adequacy, fewer Endocrinology specimens were optimal than specimens from Radiology for both the 7-gene panel era (76.2% versus 82.9%, P < 0.001) and the ThyroSeq era (88.1% versus 91.9%, P = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

The 2 thyroid FNA practices varied inversely in their adequacy rates for cytology and molecular testing. Had one practice been superior for both cytology and molecular adequacy, a recommendation for the method of choice would have been straightforward. However, our results show that optimization of FNA practice for the current practice of thyroid cytology requires further investigation due to the complex nature of specimen procurement.

Endoscopic ultrasonography in pancreatic diseases: advances in tissue acquisition

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) improved the diagnostic performance and upgraded the role of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) into an interventional modality, able to guide patient management and treatment.This review aimed to highlight the advances, emerging practices, procedural techniques and technological innovations in EUS tissue acquisition in pancreatic diseases. Methods  A thorough review of the literature was performed using PubMed to identify articles that describe techniques, advances, and practices in EUS tissue acquisition in gastrointestinal diseases. Conclusion  Since the first EUS-FNA procedure, EUS guided-tissue acquisition has been evolving continuously. Development of needles with innovative tip design enabled procurement of larger samples with preserved histological architecture. Moreover, sampling techniques and complementary methods, such as contrast harmonic imaging and EUS-elastography, have been introduced in an effort to improve diagnostic performance and sample adequacy.