Basic technique in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for solid lesions: How many passes?

Tumor Location in the Head/Uncinate Process and Presence of Fibrosis Impair the Adequacy of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition of Solid Pancreatic Tumors

Simple Summary

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition is the most accurate method to diagnose pancreatic tumors; nevertheless, this technique does not always bring adequate diagnostic accuracy. This study aimed to identify which factors can impair its adequacy. Pancreatic cytological and histological aspirates were retrospectively assessed according to two scores for grading the adequacy and the fibrosis of the specimens. The performance of the biopsies was lower when the tumor was located in the head/uncinate process of the pancreas, probably due to the higher fibrosis that we found in these sites. The specimens were less adequate also when <3 needle passes were performed and when the cell block was not done. We demonstrated the benefit to assess the presence of fibrosis in the specimens because it increased the risk of false negative results.

Abstract

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) of solid pancreatic tumors shows optimal specificity despite fair sensitivity, with an overall suboptimal diagnostic yield. We aim to quantify the adequacy and accuracy of EUS-TA and assess predictive factors for success, focusing on the presence and degree of specimen fibrosis. All consecutive EUS-TA procedures were retrieved, and the specimens were graded for sample adequacy and fibrosis. The results were evaluated according to patients’ and tumor characteristics and the EUS-TA technique. In total, 407 patients (59% male, 70 [63–77] year old) were included; sample adequacy and diagnostic accuracy were 90.2% and 94.7%, respectively. Fibrosis was significantly more represented in tumors located in the head/uncinate process (p = 0.001). Tumor location in the head/uncinate (OR 0.37 [0.14–0.99]), number of needle passes ≥ 3 (OR 4.53 [2.22–9.28]), and the use of cell block (OR 8.82 [3.23–23.8]) were independently related to adequacy. Severe fibrosis was independently related to false negative results (OR 8.37 [2.33–30.0]). Pancreatic tumors located in the head/uncinate process showed higher fibrosis, resulting in EUS-TA with lower sample adequacy and diagnostic accuracy. We maintain that three or more needle passes and cell block should be done to increase the diagnostic yield.

Optimal number of needle punctures in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy for gastric subepithelial lesions without rapid on-site evaluation

PURPOSE

The utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) for gastric subepithelial lesions (SELs) has been reported. In this study, we examined the optimal number of needle punctures during EUS-FNB for gastric SELs without rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE). The factors that allowed for a single needle puncture to arrive at the correct diagnosis were also analyzed.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of all patients who underwent EUS-FNB to evaluate gastric SELs between April 2015 and September 2020; 51 patients with 57 gastric SELs were enrolled. The optimal number of needle punctures was determined when additional needle passes did not increase diagnostic sensitivity by more than 10%. Factors allowing for only a single needle puncture to arrive at the correct diagnosis were identified by univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

EUS-FNB resulted in a definitive final diagnosis in 48 of 57 lesions (84%). Lesions in the gastric body (odds ratio [OR] 6.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.75-21.6; P < 0.01) and lesions punctured using a 22G Franseen needle (OR 3.61, 95% CI 1.07-12.3; P = 0.04) were independent factors that allowed for only a single needle puncture to arrive at the correct diagnosis. The optimal number of needle punctures for lesions using a 22G Franseen needle in the gastric body and other lesions was two and three, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The optimal number of needle punctures in EUS-FNB for gastric SELs without ROSE was two or three, depending on the location and type of needle used.

Comparison of EUS-guided conventional smear and liquid-based cytology in pancreatic lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has limitations of inadequate sampling and false-negative results for malignancy. It has been performed using conventional smear (CS) cytology with rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) with reasonable diagnostic accuracy. An alternative to ROSE is liquid-based cytology (LBC). Commonly used LBC techniques include precipitation-based (SurePath™) and filtration-based (ThinPrep ^® , CellPrep ^® ). Data regarding the diagnostic efficacy of LBC compared with CS are limited. Methods  Multiple databases were searched through March 2020 to identify studies reporting diagnostic yield of EUS-guided CS and LBC in pancreatic lesions. Pooled diagnostic odds and rates of performance for the cytologic diagnoses of benign, suspicious, and malignant lesions were calculated. Diagnostic efficacy was evaluated by pooled rates of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV). Results  Nine studies with a total of 1308 patients were included in our final analysis. Pooled diagnostic odds of CS cytology were 1.69 (CI 1.02-2.79) and 0.39 (CI 0.19-0.8) for malignant lesions when compared to filtration-based and precipitation-based LBC techniques, respectively. For CS, precipitation-based and filtration-based LBC, pooled diagnostic accuracy was 79.7 %, 85.2 %, 77.3 %, sensitivity was 79.2 %, 83.6 %, 68.3 %, and specificity was 99.4 %, 99.5 %, 99.5 %, respectively. Conclusions  The precipitation-based LBC technique (SurePath™) had superior diagnostic odds for malignant pancreatic lesions compared with CS cytology in the absence of ROSE. It showed superior accuracy and sensitivity, but comparable specificity and PPV. Diagnostic odds of CS cytology in the absence of ROSE were superior to the filtration-based LBC technique (ThinPrep ^® , Cellprep ^® ) for diagnosing malignant pancreatic lesions.

Evaluation of Pancreatic Lesions With Endoscopic Ultrasound and Fine Needle Aspiration

Background. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and fine-needle aspiration (FNA) are commonly used for assessing pancreatic lesions. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic yield and accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in a single tertiary institution. Methods. Consecutive patients who underwent EUS-FNA of the pancreas at Queen Mary Hospital, Hong Kong, from January 2015 to March 2016 were retrospectively reviewed. Endoscopic findings and FNA results were analysed. For patients who subsequently underwent surgical resection of pancreatic lesion, EUS-FNA diagnoses were compared to histopathological findings of surgical specimens to determine its diagnostic accuracy. Results. One hundred twelve EUS-FNA were performed in 99 patients within the study time period and were included for analysis. Sixty-six (66.7%) pancreatic lesions were solid in nature and 33 (33.3%) were cystic. The overall diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA was 70.5% (n = 79). On multivariate analysis, more passes of needle were associated with a higher diagnostic yield (odds ratio = 2.000, P = .049). 57.1% (n = 64) of EUS-FNA results had an impact on management. Sixteen patients with diagnostic EUS-FNA subsequently underwent surgery for resection of the pancreatic lesion. Upon correlation to the histopathological findings of surgical specimens, there were 12 true-positive, 2 true-negative, 0 false-positive, and 2 false-negative cases. Sensitivity was 85.7%, specificity was 100%, positive predictive value was 100%, and negative predictive value was 50%. The diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA was 87.5%. Conclusion. EUS-FNA is accurate and reliable for diagnosing pancreatic lesions.

Suction versus slow-pull for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic tumors: a prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Suction (S) is commonly used to improve cell acquisition during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). Slow-pull (SP) sampling is another technique that might procure good quality specimens with less bloodiness. We aimed to determine if SP improves the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA of pancreatic masses.

METHODS

Patients with pancreatic solid masses were randomized to four needle passes with both techniques in an alternate fashion. Sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values were calculated. Cellularity and bloodiness of cytological samples were assessed and compared according to the technique.

RESULTS

Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of suction vs. SP were 95.2% vs. 92.3%; 100% vs. 100; 95.7% vs. 93%, respectively. As to the association of methods, they were 95.6, 100 and 96%, respectively. Positive predictive values for S and SP were 100%. There was no difference in diagnostic yield between S and SP (p = 0.344). Cellularity of samples obtained with SP and Suction were equivalent in both smear evaluation (p = 0.119) and cell-block (0.980). Bloodiness of SP and suction techniques were similar as well.

CONCLUSIONS

S and SP techniques provide equivalent sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. Association of methods seems to improve diagnostic yield. Suction does not increase the bloodiness of samples compared to slow-pull.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration and Biopsy in Gastrointestinal Subepithelial Tumors

The incidence of asymptomatic and incidentally found upper gastrointestinal subepithelial tumors (SETs) is increasing with the implementation of national cancer screening and the development of high-resolution endoscopy in Korea. However, endoscopy alone cannot be used to determine whether SETs are benign or malignant. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is used to further characterize these lesions through the examination of their layered structure, internal echogenicity, size, and relationship to the extramural structure. These provide additional information on whether the lesion is benign or malignant. Nevertheless, the sensitivity and specificity of EUS alone in predicting malignancy is unsatisfactory. Recent guidelines have recommended deciding the timing of EUS-fine needle aspiration and biopsy (EUS-FNA/B) for SETs based on tumor size, malignant features on endoscopy, and high-risk features on EUS. The diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA/B is reportedly influenced by factors including needle size, number of needle passes, use of suction, use of a stylet in the needle assembly, fanning technique, availability of an on-site cytopathologist, and experience of the endosonographer. Therefore, according to the characteristics of the SETs, various subsequent methods and techniques should be appropriately employed to improve the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA/B.

Efficacy of 3 fine-needle biopsy techniques for suspected pancreatic malignancies in the absence of an on-site cytopathologist

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration/biopsy (EUS-FNA/B) has a high diagnostic accuracy for pancreatic tumors. Most reports have focused on the diagnostic yield of cytology or histology; the ability of various FNA/B techniques to obtain an adequate mass of cells or tissue has rarely been investigated.

METHODS

Patients with suspected pancreatic malignancy underwent EUS-FNB using a 22-gauge ProCore needle by either the stylet slow-pull-back technique (group A), conventional negative suction after stylet removal (group B), or non-suction after stylet removal (group C) in the absence of an on-site cytopathologist. The adequacy of the 3 techniques based on the diagnostic yield, cellularity, blood contamination, and core-tissue acquisition was evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients (27 males) were analyzed. The mean tumor size was 21 to 40 mm in 54%. The rate of a good or excellent proportion of cellularity was highest in group A compared with groups B and C (72% vs 60% vs 50%, P = .049). A >25% rate of blood contamination was more prevalent in group B (30% vs 42% vs 10%, P = .009). The rate of adequate core-tissue acquisition was not different (52% vs 34% vs 50%, P = .140). Based on the multivariate generalized estimation equation, the stylet slow-pull-back technique and a tumor size >40 mm were favorable factors for diagnostic adequacy.

CONCLUSIONS

The stylet slow-pull-back technique might enable acquisition of tissue and assessment of cellularity for the diagnosis of pancreatic tumors suspected to be malignant. (Clinical trial registration number: KCT0002190.).

Hepatic fine-needle aspiration cytology: The role of rapid on-site evaluation in the assessment of hepatic lesions

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Radiologically guided fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) of internal organs is not cost-effective. Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) of smears by a cytopathologist can improve the diagnostic yield of FNACs and save time and money by reducing the need for repeat procedure/biopsy. To determine the role of ROSE in the diagnostic outcome of hepatic lesions by comparative analysis of FNAC with and without ROSE by a cytopathologist.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Hepatic FNACs were retrospectively analyzed over two separate time periods from January 2011 to June 2013 and from January 2015 to July 2016. Smears from 2015-2016 were subjected to ROSE by a cytopathologist after staining with toluidine blue for 1 min to assess adequacy of the material. Final report was given after hematoxylin and eosin, May Grünwald Giemsa, and Papanicolaou staining were performed. Chi-square test (non-parametric) was used to determine if there was a statistically significant increase in the diagnostic yield with ROSE.

RESULTS

During 2011-2013, of the 160 radiologically guided FNACs for hepatic lesions, 22 were non-diagnostic, whereas during 2015-2016, of 142 radiologically guided hepatic FNACs, only six were non-diagnostic. With the application of ROSE, there was a statistically significant increase in the diagnostic yield of hepatic FNACs from 86.25% to 95.8% (p=0.015).

CONCLUSION

ROSE performed by a cytopathologist using toluidine blue can increase the diagnostic yield of hepatic FNACs and reduce the cost of healthcare by eliminating the need for a repeat procedure.

Paediatric pancreaticobiliary endoscopy: a 21-year experience from a tertiary hepatobiliary centre and systematic literature review

Background

In adults ERCP and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) are standard methods of evaluating and treating many hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) conditions. HPB disease is being diagnosed with increasing frequency in children but information about role of ERCP and EUS and their outcomes in this population remain limited. Therefore the aims of this study were to describe the paediatric ERCP and EUS experience from a large tertiary referral HPB centre, and to systematically compare outcomes with those of other published series.

Methods

All patients <18 years undergoing an ERCP or EUS between January 1992–December 2014 were included. Indications for the procedure, rates of technical success, procedural adverse events and reinterventions were recorded in all cases.

Results

Ninety children underwent 111 procedures (87 ERCPs and 24 EUS). 53% (48) were female with a median age of 14 years (range: 3 months - 17 years). Procedures were performed under general anaesthesia (n = 48) or conscious sedation (n = 63). Common indications for ERCP included chronic or recurrent pancreatitis and biliary obstruction. Patients frequently had multiple comorbidities, with a median ASA grade of 2 (range 1–4). Therapeutic procedures performed included biliary or pancreatic sphincterotomy, common bile duct or pancreatic duct stone removal, biliary or pancreatic stent insertion, EUS-guided fine needle aspiration and endoscopic transmural drainage of pancreatic fluid collections. No adverse events were reported following ERCP but there was one complication requiring surgery following EUS guided cystenterostomy.

Conclusion

ERCP and EUS in children and adolescents have high technical success rates and low rates of adverse events when performed in high volume HPB centres.

Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles

AIM

To evaluate the cytological diagnostic capacity and sample quality of the slow-pull technique and compare them with different suction techniques.

METHODS

From July 2010 to December 2015, 102 patients with pancreatic solid lesions who underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) with 22-gauge needles were retrospectively evaluated. EUS-FNA diagnosis was based on a cytological examination, and final diagnosis was based on a comprehensive standard of cytological diagnosis, surgical pathology and clinical or imaging follow-up. Cytological specimens were characterized for cellularity and blood contamination. The cytological diagnostic capacity and sample quality of the slow-pull technique and suction techniques with 5-mL/10-mL/20-mL syringes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of all of the EUS-FNA procedures, the slow-pull technique and suction techniques with 5-mL/10-mL/20-mL syringes were used in 31, 19, 34 and 18 procedures, respectively. There were significant differences between these four suction techniques in terms of cytological diagnostic accuracy (90.3% vs 63.2% vs 58.8% vs 55.6%, P = 0.019), sensitivity (88.2% vs 41.7% vs 40.0% vs 36.4%, P = 0.009) and blood contamination (score ≥ 2 for 29.0% vs 52.6% vs 70.6% vs 72.2%, P = 0.003). The accuracy and sensitivity of the slow-pull technique were significantly higher than those of the suction techniques using 5-mL (P = 0.03, P = 0.014), 10-mL (P = 0.005; P = 0.006) and 20-mL syringes (P = 0.01, P = 0.01). Blood contamination was significantly lower in the slow-pull technique than in the suction techniques with 10-mL (P = 0.001) and 20-mL syringes (P = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

The slow-pull technique may increase the cytological diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity with slight blood contamination during EUS-FNA when using 22-gauge needles for solid pancreatic masses.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration of Pancreatic Lesions: A Systematic Review of Technical and Procedural Variables

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition has emerged over the last decade as an invaluable diagnostic tool in approaching the different pancreatic lesions. Given the safety and minimal invasiveness of this approach combined with the high diagnostic yield, it became the standard of care when dealing with different pancreatic pathologies. However, some variables regarding this procedure remain not fully understood. These can influence the diagnostic yield of the procedure and include the presence of the on-site cytopathologist, the type and size of the needle used as well as obtaining aspiration versus core biopsy, the number of passes and the sampling technique, and the role of suction and stylet use among others. We performed a comprehensive literature search using PubMed, Google Scholar, and Embase for studies that assessed these variables. Eligible studies were analyzed using several parameters such as technique and procedure, with the aim of reviewing results from an evidence-based standpoint.

A rare case of mediastinal metastasis of ovarian carcinoma diagnosed by endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA)

Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) has become a minimally invasive tool with excellent diagnostic accuracy and low risk of complications in the diagnosis of thoracic diseases, including lung cancers and primary mediastinal lesions. Occasionally, EBUS-TBNA may be useful in identifying thoracic metastasis from distant tumors. Here we report an interesting and rare case of mediastinal metastasis of ovarian carcinoma diagnosed by EBUS-TBNA.

Cell-block procedure in endoscopic ultrasound-guided-fine-needle-aspiration of gastrointestinal solid neoplastic lesions

In the present review we have analyzed the clinical applications of endoscopic ultrasound-guided-fine-needle-aspiration (EUS-FNA) and the methodological aspects obtained by cell-block procedure (CBP) in the diagnostic approach to the gastrointestinal neoplastic pathology. CBP showed numerous advantages in comparison to the cytologic routine smears; in particular, better preservation of cell architecture, achievement of routine haematoxylin-eosin staining equivalent to histological slides and possibility to perform immunohistochemistry or molecular analyses represented the most evident reasons to choose this method. Moreover, by this approach, the differential diagnosis of solid gastrointestinal neoplasias may be more easily achieved and the background of contaminant non-neoplastic gastrointestinal avoided. Finally, biological samples collected by EUS-FNA CBP-assisted should be investigated in order to identify and quantify further potential molecular markers.

Factors associated with endoscopic full-thickness resection of gastric submucosal tumors

Objective

To identify factors that impact the procedure and treatment outcomes for endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) of gastric submucosal tumors (SMTs).

Methods

Medical records were collected for all patients with gastric SMTs who underwent EFTR procedures in Shengjing Hospital between June 2012 and April 2014. The data from each patient were reviewed, including gender, age, maximum tumor size on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), tumor location in stomach, length of EFTR procedure, pneumoperitoneum during EFTR, cost to close defects, length of hospital stay after the procedure, and procedure-related complications.

Results

Endoscopic full-thickness resection of gastric SMTs was successfully performed in all 41 patients. Maximum size on EUS [parameter estimate (PE) = 4.443, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 2.191–6.695; p = 0.000] and tumor location in the greater curvature (PE = 44.441, 95 % CI 5.539–83.343; p = 0.026) were significantly associated with the length of the procedure. A pneumoperitoneum was more likely to occur during EFTR in tumors with a larger EUS size [odds ratio (OR) = 1.415, 95 % CI 1.034–1.936; p = 0.03], and less likely to occur during EFTR for tumors located in the posterior wall (OR = 0.003, 95 % CI 0–0.351; p = 0.017). The use of the over-the-scope clip (OTSC) system was significantly associated with shorter hospital stays (PE = −1.006, 95 % CI −1.998 to −0.014; p = 0.047) and a higher cost of closing defects (PE = 854.742, 95 % CI 358.377–1351.107; p = 0.001).

Conclusions

Endoscopic full-thickness resection is an effective and safe method for removing gastric SMTs. Tumor size on EUS and location of the tumor were associated with the duration of EFTR and the occurrence of a pneumoperitoneum during the procedure. The use of an OTSC system was significantly associated with shorter hospital stays and a higher cost of closing defects.