Optimal number of needle passes during EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions with 22G ProCore needles and different suction techniques: A randomized controlled trial

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue sampling: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Technical and Technology Review

This Technical and Technology Review from the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) represents an update of the previous document on the technical aspects of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling in gastroenterology, including the available types of needle, technical aspects of tissue sampling, new devices, and specimen handling and processing. Among the most important new recommendations are:ESGE recommends end-cutting fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles over reverse-bevel FNB or fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needles for tissue sampling of solid pancreatic lesions; FNA may still have a role when rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) is available.ESGE recommends EUS-FNB or mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB) equally for tissue sampling of subepithelial lesions ≥20 mm in size. MIAB could represent the first choice for smaller lesions (<20 mm) if proper expertise is available.ESGE does not recommend the use of antibiotic prophylaxis before EUS-guided tissue sampling of solid masses and EUS-FNA of pancreatic cystic lesions.

Dry Suction Versus Wet Suction of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy for Diagnosis of Solid Pancreatic Lesions: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Noninferiority Trial

INTRODUCTION

Conclusions regarding the suction techniques of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) remain controversial. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the dry suction vs wet suction technique in solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs) and determine the optimal number of passes for EUS-FNB.

METHODS

This investigation was conducted as a multicenter, randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial. Patients with SPLs were randomly allocated to receive either the dry or wet suction technique. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy. The secondary outcomes included sensitivity, specificity, optimal number of needle passes, specimen quality, procedure time, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Of the 200 patients, 193 were included in the final analysis, with 96 in the dry suction group and 97 in the wet suction group. The diagnostic accuracies were 97.92% and 96.91% in the dry and wet groups, respectively, with a 1.01% difference between the study groups (2-sided 95% CI, -3.47% to 5.48%, P = 0.659). The overall adverse event rate was 2.6%. No significant differences were observed in sample adequacy (98.9% vs 98.9%, P = 1) or blood contamination ( P = 0.796). Regarding procedure time, there was no statistical difference (18.68 ± 8.03 minutes vs 19.36 ± 8.89 minutes, P = 0.626); however, more procedural steps were required in the wet suction technique. No significant difference was found between the cumulative diagnostic accuracy of each needle (first pass 93.78% vs second pass 95.34% vs third pass 97.41%, P = 0.225).

DISCUSSION

The dry suction technique is noninferior to the wet suction technique for EUS-FNB in SPLs. In the absence of rapid on-site evaluation, only one pass was required to achieve more than 90% diagnostic accuracy ( ClinicalTrial.gov number NCT05549856).

Endoscopic Ultrasound armamentarium for precise and early diagnosis of biliopancreatic lesions

The diagnostic paradigm for biliopancreatic lesions has been revolutionized by continuous advancements in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) technologies and techniques. This review examines the expanding diagnostic toolkit available to clinicians, emphasizing innovations that have significantly enhanced precision and early detection capabilities. One of the most transformative advancements is the development of fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles. Modern designs, including Franseen, and fork-tip configurations, have optimized tissue sampling, achieving diagnostic accuracies exceeding 90 % while minimizing the number of needle passes required. These innovations facilitate the acquisition of high-quality histological specimens suitable for comprehensive molecular profiling, paving the way for personalized therapeutic approaches. Concurrent advancements in sampling techniques have bolstered these needle design improvements. The fanning technique has been particularly effective, increasing diagnostic yields from 71 % to 88 %. Wet suction methods preserve tissue integrity better than traditional approaches, while standardized protocols for needle passes enhance procedural efficiency. For specimen evaluation, Rapid On-Site Evaluation (ROSE) offers 93 % sensitivity, while alternatives like Macroscopic On-Site Evaluation (MOSE) provide comparable accuracy while reducing dependency on specialized personnel and resources. Image enhancement technologies have markedly improved the ability to characterize lesions. Contrast Harmonic EUS (CH-EUS) is particularly effective in differentiating pancreatic cancer from other solid lesions, with meta-analyses confirming sensitivity and specificity of 94 % and 89 %, respectively. Its ability to detect lesions as small as 15 mm makes it invaluable for early diagnosis. In cystic lesions, CH-EUS excels in identifying malignant mural nodules, with diagnostic accuracies reaching 96 %. The integration of elastography and advanced digital imaging technologies has further expanded diagnostic capabilities. Strain elastography provides qualitative insights into tissue characteristics, while shear wave elastography offers quantitative measurements of stiffness, adding diagnostic precision. Similarly, technologies like detective flow imaging match the accuracy of contrast-enhanced techniques in pancreatic cancer detection and enhance vascular assessment. For cystic lesions, diagnostics have progressed beyond traditional fluid analysis. Techniques such as through-the-needle biopsy (TTNB) have improved diagnostic yields to 74 %, albeit with a modest risk of complications. Incorporating molecular markers and next-generation sequencing allows differentiation between cystic lesion subtypes and more accurate assessment of malignant potential. This array of diagnostic tools offers unprecedented potential for early and precise diagnosis of biliopancreatic lesions. Integrating these innovations into clinical practice requires careful consideration of their strengths and limitations. Future research should aim to standardize protocols and establish evidence-based algorithms for their combined use, with the ultimate goal of improving patient outcomes through earlier detection and tailored management of biliopancreatic pathologies.

Comparing needle types and aspiration techniques in EUS-TA to optimize diagnostic efficacy and specimen quality in patients with pancreatic lesions

Purpose

In solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs), we compared the diagnostic efficacy of a 19G fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needle and a 22G ProCore fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle, We also compared the specimen quality between the standard suction (SS) technique and heparinized wet-suction (HWS) technique.

Methods

All cases of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) by 19G FNA or 22G FNB for SPLs in a single-centre hospital were retrospectively reviewed. The diagnostic yield was compared between the 19G and 22G groups. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify optimal factors for a correct histological diagnosis. We also examined tissue integrity, the length of the tissue cores, and the rate of blood cell contamination between the SS and HWS groups.

Results

One hundred seventy-one and sixty-three patients were included in the comparisons of needle types and suction techniques, respectively. The 19G group had higher histological diagnosis rates compared to the 22G group for the first pass (87.8% vs. 70.4%, p = 0.005), the second pass (82.2% vs. 65.4%, p = 0.012), the first two passes (90.0% vs. 72.8%, p = 0.004), and the final diagnosis (91.1% vs. 79%, p = 0.025). Through macroscopic on-site evaluation, a significantly higher proportion of patients in the 22G group required a third needle pass compared to the 19G group (88.9% vs. 67.8%, p = 0.002). The total procedure time was shorter in the 19G group than in the 22G group (p < 0.001). The HWS group showed superiority over the SS group in terms of the total length of tissue cores (p < 0.001) and the total length of white tissue cores (p = 0.005). The HWS group, compared to the SS group, can enhance the tissue integrity (p = 0.024) and reduce blood cell contamination (p = 0.040) during the first needle pass. There was no significant difference in complication rates between the needle puncture groups (p = 0.770) or the aspiration technique groups (p = 0.654).

Conclusion

Compared to the 22G FNB needle, endoscopists should consider using the 19G FNA needle when appropriate. Furthermore, the use of the HWS technique for the first pass is recommended to improve specimen quality.

Effect of the number of passes on diagnostic performance of EUS fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic masses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The optimal number of passes to maximize the diagnostic ability of EUS fine-needle biopsy (FNB) of solid pancreatic masses (SPMs) is not well known. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the impact of the incremental number of passes on diagnostic accuracy, tissue adequacy, and diagnostic yield for EUS-FNB of SPMs.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Central for randomized controlled trials comparing per-pass diagnostic outcomes of FNB needles in patients with SPMs. Meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects models. A separate analysis was performed on studies that used contemporary Franseen and fork-tip needles.

RESULTS

Overall, 19 randomized controlled trials (N = 3552) were identified. For EUS-FNB of SPMs, 3 passes with any FNB needle outperformed 2 passes for accuracy (odds ratio [OR], 1.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-2.09; I2 = 0%), adequacy (OR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.30-2.83; I2 = 61%), and yield (OR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.37-3.27; I2 = 14%). Adding a fourth or fifth pass resulted in no significant improvement in diagnostic parameters. When using contemporary FNB needles, adding a second to a single pass significantly improved accuracy (OR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.23-2.63; I2 = 0%), adequacy (OR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.65-2.90; I2 = 0%), and yield (OR, 2.72; 95% CI, 1.50-4.95; I2 = 0%). Adding a third pass to a second pass with contemporary needles improved adequacy (OR, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.97-4.46; I2 = 0%) but did not provide better diagnostic accuracy or yield.

CONCLUSIONS

Two passes with Franseen or fork-tip needles and 3 passes with any FNB needle suffice to provide optimal diagnostic performance for EUS-FNB of SPMs, without additional diagnostic benefits with more passes. Our results can inform future guidelines and quality benchmarks.

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.

Comments and illustrations of the European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine guidelines: Rare pancreatic tumors, ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound features-Malignant mesenchymal tumors

Rare malignant mesenchymal pancreatic tumors are systematized and reported in this review. The focus is on the appearance on imaging. The present overview summarizes the data and shows that not every pancreatic tumor corresponds to the most common entities of ductal adenocarcinoma or neuroendocrine tumor.

Exploring KRAS-mutant pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a model validation study

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has the highest mortality rate among all solid tumors. Tumorigenesis is promoted by the oncogene KRAS, and KRAS mutations are prevalent in patients with PDAC. Therefore, a comprehensive understanding of the interactions between KRAS mutations and PDAC may expediate the development of therapeutic strategies for reversing the progression of malignant tumors. Our study aims at establishing and validating a prediction model of KRAS mutations in patients with PDAC based on survival analysis and mRNA expression.

METHODS

A total of 184 and 412 patients with PDAC from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database and the International Cancer Genome Consortium (ICGC), respectively, were included in the study.

RESULTS

After tumor mutation profile and copy number variation (CNV) analyses, we established and validated a prediction model of KRAS mutations, based on survival analysis and mRNA expression, that contained seven genes: CSTF2, FAF2, KIF20B, AKR1A1, APOM, KRT6C, and CD70. We confirmed that the model has a good predictive ability for the prognosis of overall survival (OS) in patients with KRAS-mutated PDAC. Then, we analyzed differential biological pathways, especially the ferroptosis pathway, through principal component analysis, pathway enrichment analysis, Gene Ontology (GO) enrichment analysis, and gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA), with which patients were classified into low- or high-risk groups. Pathway enrichment results revealed enrichment in the cytokine-cytokine receptor interaction, metabolism of xenobiotics by cytochrome P450, and viral protein interaction with cytokine and cytokine receptor pathways. Most of the enriched pathways are metabolic pathways predominantly enriched by downregulated genes, suggesting numerous downregulated metabolic pathways in the high-risk group. Subsequent tumor immune infiltration analysis indicated that neutrophil infiltration, resting CD4 memory T cells, and resting natural killer (NK) cells correlated with the risk score. After verifying that the seven gene expression levels in different KRAS-mutated pancreatic cancer cell lines were similar to that in the model, we screened potential drugs related to the risk score.

DISCUSSION

This study established, analyzed, and validated a model for predicting the prognosis of PDAC based on risk stratification according to KRAS mutations, and identified differential pathways and highly effective drugs.

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.

Current status and issues in genomic analysis using EUS-FNA/FNB specimens in hepatobiliary-pancreatic cancers

Comprehensive genomic profiling based on next-generation sequencing has recently been used to provide precision medicine for various advanced cancers. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) play essential roles in the diagnosis of abdominal masses, mainly pancreatic cancers. In recent years, CGP analysis using EUS-FNA/FNB specimens for hepatobiliary-pancreatic cancers has increased; however, the success rate of CGP analysis is not clinically satisfactory, and many issues need to be resolved to improve the success rate of CGP analysis. In this article, we review the transition from EUS-FNA to FNB, compare each test, and discuss the current status and issues in genomic analysis of hepatobiliary-pancreatic cancers using EUS-FNA/FNB specimens.

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.

Comparative diagnostic performance of different techniques for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Evidence is limited on the comparative diagnostic performance of tissue sampling techniques for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling of pancreatic masses. We performed a systematic review with network meta-analysis to compare these techniques.

METHODS

Rates of sample adequacy, blood contamination, and tissue integrity using fine-needle biopsy sampling needles were evaluated. Direct and indirect comparisons were performed among the slow-pull, dry-suction, modified wet-suction, or no-suction techniques. Results are expressed as risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Overall, 9 randomized controlled trials (756 patients) were identified. On network meta-analysis, the no-suction technique was significantly inferior to the other techniques (RR, .85 [95% CI, .78-.92] vs slow pull; RR, .85 [95% CI, .78-.92] vs dry suction; RR, .83 [95% CI, .76-.90] vs modified wet suction) in terms of sample adequacy. Consequently, modified wet suction was shown to be the best technique (surface under the cumulative ranking curve score, .90), with the no-suction technique showing poorer performance in terms of sample adequacy (surface under the cumulative ranking curve score, .14). Dry suction was associated with significantly higher rates of blood contamination as compared with the slow-pull technique (RR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.15-1.80), whereas no suction led to less blood contamination of samples in comparison with other techniques (RR, .71 [95% CI, .52-.97] vs slow pull; RR, .49 [95% CI, .36-.66] vs dry suction; RR, .57 [95% CI, .40-.81] vs modified wet suction). The modified wet-suction technique significantly outperformed dry suction in terms of tissue integrity of the sample (RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.06-1.75).

CONCLUSIONS

Modified wet suction seemed to provide high rates of integrity and adequate samples, albeit with high blood contamination. The no-suction technique performed significantly worse than other sampling strategies.

Recent Developments in the Field of Endoscopic Ultrasound for Diagnosis, Staging, and Treatment of Pancreatic Lesions

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) plays a crucial role in the diagnosis of both solid and cystic pancreatic lesions and in the staging of patients with pancreatic cancer through its use for tissue and fluid sampling. Additionally, in cases of precancerous lesions, EUS-guided therapy can also be provided. This review aims to describe the most recent developments regarding the role of EUS in the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic lesions. Moreover, complementary EUS imaging modalities, the role of artificial intelligence, new devices, and modalities for tissue acquisition, and techniques for EUS-guided treatment are discussed.

Endoscopic Ultrasound Advanced Techniques for Diagnosis of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumours

Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GISTs) are subepithelial lesions (SELs) that commonly develop in the gastrointestinal tract. GISTs, unlike other SELs, can exhibit malignant behavior, so differential diagnosis is critical to the decision-making process. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is considered the most accurate imaging method for diagnosing and differentiating SELs in the gastrointestinal tract by assessing the lesions precisely and evaluating their malignant risk. Due to their overlapping imaging characteristics, endosonographers may have difficulty distinguishing GISTs from other SELs using conventional EUS alone, and the collection of tissue samples from these lesions may be technically challenging. Even though it appears to be less effective in the case of smaller lesions, histology is now the gold standard for achieving a final diagnosis and avoiding unnecessary and invasive treatment for benign SELs. The use of enhanced EUS modalities and elastography has improved the diagnostic ability of EUS. Furthermore, recent advancements in artificial intelligence systems that use EUS images have allowed them to distinguish GISTs from other SELs, thereby improving their diagnostic accuracy.

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.

Is contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy better than conventional fine needle biopsy? A retrospective study in a medical center

BACKGROUND

Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (CE-EUS-FNA) could help clinicians to precisely locate and puncture lesions, but its effect on the diagnostic yield improvement is controversial. We designed this study to observe the additional benefit of using contrast in EUS-guided tissue sampling while performing fine needle biopsy (FNB) instead of FNA, as FNB results in a higher diagnostic accuracy.

METHOD

Patients who underwent EUS-FNB performed by a single medical team from January 2019 to March 2021 were included in this study. We analyzed the cytopathological diagnostic accuracy rate and number of needle passes between groups who underwent FNB with and without contrast.

RESULT

We divided 133 patients who were diagnosed with a malignancy into two groups according to whether they underwent CE-EUS-FNB (n = 48) or conventional EUS-FNB (n = 85). The CE-EUS-FNB group had an equal diagnostic accuracy rate with fewer needle passes compared with the conventional EUS-FNB group. There was no significant trend change in the success cytopathological diagnostic rate for experienced endoscopists for EUS-FNA.

CONCLUSION

CE-EUS-FNB had fewer needle passes but no additional benefit for diagnostic yield improvement. There was no difficult threshold for CE-EUS-FNB for endoscopists who were well trained in conventional FNA.