Endoscopic ultrasound guided liver biopsy: Recent evidence

The Benign Liver EUS Optimal Core Study (BLOCs): A Prospective Randomized Multicenter Study Evaluating Wet-suction Versus Slow Pull Technique for EUS-guided Liver Biopsy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The specimen quality of endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) for benign liver disease evaluation depends on the technique and type of needle used. Using a 19-gauge (19 g) fine needle biopsy (FNB) needle with 3 actuations and wet suction (WS) or slow stylet pull is the current preferred practice. We conducted a randomized prospective multicenter trial to compare wet suction (WS) to slow stylet pull (SP) technique to compare histologic yields, length of procedure, and adverse events (AE).

METHODS

This prospective randomized trial (NCT03245580) included patients undergoing EUS-LB for parenchymal biopsy at 6 centers in the United States in 2020-2021. A 19 g Franseen tip EUS needle was used for all procedures. For WS, the needle was flushed with saline, and a 20 ml suction syringe with 3 to 5 ml of fluid was used. For SP, a slow pullback of stylet was used. Pathologist was blinded for tissue interpretation.

RESULTS

One hundred fifty-three patients across 6 tertiary centers were included, with 75 patients in the WS arm and 78 patients in the SP arm. Histologic outcomes were superior in WS compared with SP [aggregate specimen length (46.5 vs. 34.5 mm, P<0.001), length of longest fragment (14 vs. 11 mm, P<0.001), and number of complete portal tracts (16 vs. 11.5, P<0.001)]. The overall ability to make a histological diagnosis was higher in WS (99% vs. 92%). Procedure length and AE did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of WS compared with SP for EUS-LB resulted in superior specimen yields. Total procedure time and adverse events were similar for both techniques.

Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasonography: Advances in Application

Technological advances have greatly expanded the diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). The integration of cutting-edge imaging techniques, including tissue harmonic echo, contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS, elastography, and needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy, have significantly enhanced lesion characterization and diagnostic accuracy. Additionally, developments in stent design and the introduction of new accessories have broadened the therapeutic applications of EUS. Ongoing innovations in clinical practice have transformed procedures such as drainage, tumor ablation, EUS-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), the placement of fiducial markers, advancements in endohepatology, lesion characterization, and treatment. These developments continue to expand the role of EUS in delivering precise and effective therapeutic interventions.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided liver biopsy and portal pressure gradient: when, why and how? Can it become the standard of care in endo-hepatology?

INTRODUCTION

The armamentarium of 'Endo-hepatology' is proliferating with the advancements in techniques and availability of new devices in the field of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). This has resulted in the merger of multitude of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, such as EUS-liver biopsy (LB), EUS-angioembolization of gastric varices, EUS-portal pressure gradient (PPG) measurement, and others into a 'one-stop-shop' for efficient patient management. Lack of standardization of these techniques forms a major hinderance in their widespread adoption.

AREAS COVERED

A comprehensive literature search was undertaken across various databases on EUS-LB and EUS-PPG till November 2024 for reviews, observational studies, and randomized trials on EUS-LB and EUS-PPG, describing its indications, technique, and data of safety and efficacy, detailing its role in day-to-day clinical practice.

EXPERT OPINION

EUS-LB and EUS-PPG have shown promise in the ever-growing field of endo-hepatology. EUS-LB has exhibited excellent safety profile and comparable tissue yield compared to its percutaneous counterpart. On the other hand, EUS-PPG seems to be a viable alternative although it needs to be standardized further. From a patient and hospital perspective, they might prove to be convenient and cost-effective. Nevertheless, more evidence is warranted before they can be labeled as the new standard of care.

Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in the Diagnosis and Management of Complications of Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Inflammatory bowel disease-related complications are associated with a decreased quality of life, requirement for surgery, and increased morbidity. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is accurate at identifying and characterizing perianal fistulae and abscesses and helps guide treatment decisions. EUS also allows us to accurately assess for mucosal and transmural inflammation and thus can help differentiate Crohn's disease from ulcerative colitis (UC). EUS use can help predict dysplasia in UC, and monitoring transmural inflammation can help assess response to treatment. In addition to diagnostic EUS, therapeutic EUS techniques have been used to endoscopically drain abscesses and bypass strictures in Crohn's disease.

Non-Invasive versus Invasive Assessment of Portal Hypertension in Chronic Liver Disease

Background

Cirrhosis is one of the major causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide and the second leading cause of digestive disease mortality. Portal hypertension is the main driver of cirrhosis-related complications such as ascites and variceal bleeding. Portal hypertension is defined as a hepatic venous pressure gradient >5 mm Hg, although it is clinically significant and associated with clinical complications when >10 mm Hg.

Summary

Therefore, detection of clinically significant portal hypertension (CSPH) in chronic advanced liver disease or compensated cirrhosis is of paramount importance to guide the management of these patients.

Key Messages

This study aimed at revising the non-invasive and invasive tools for assessment of portal hypertension and risk stratification for CSPH in patients with chronic liver disease.

III BRAZILIAN CONSENSUS STATEMENT ON ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND

BACKGROUND

In the past decades, endoscopic ultrasound has developed from a diagnostic tool to a platform for many therapeutic interventions. Various technological advancements have emerged since the last Brazilian Consensus, demanding a review and update of the recommendations based on the best scientific evidence.

METHODS

A group of 32 renowned echoendoscopists selected eight relevant topics to be discussed to generate clinical questions. After that, a literature review was conducted to answer these questions based on the most updated evidence.

RESULTS

Thirty-three statements were formulated and voted on by the experts to reach a consensus. The Oxford System was used to grade the level of evidence.

CONCLUSION

There is mo-derate evidence to support that the needle shape, gauge, or aspiration technique does not influence the yield of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue sampling of pancreatic solid lesions. There is moderate evidence to support using EUS-TTNB of the cyst wall to differentiate between mucinous and non-mucinous cystic neoplasms. There is little evidence to support the EUS-guided treatment of gastric varices. There is a high level of evidence to support that EUS-guided biliary drainage and ERCP present similar outcomes in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction. There is a high level of evidence for using EUS to diagnose neoplastic pancreatic cysts and detect necrosis before indicating drainage. There is moderate evidence to support EUS-GE over duodenal stent for malignant gastric outlet obstruction in patients with a life expectancy higher than 2 months. There is a high level of evidence to support the use of RFA in treating both functioning and non-functioning types of NET.

Role of Imaging in Screening for Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Primary liver cancer is among the most common cancers globally. It is the sixth-most common malignancy encountered and the third-most common cause of cancer-related death. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary liver malignancy, accounting for about 90% of primary liver cancers. The majority of HCCs occur in patients with underlying cirrhosis, which results from chronic liver diseases such as fatty liver, hepatitis B and hepatitis C infections, and chronic alcohol use, which are the leading causes. The obesity pandemic has led to an increased prevalence of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), which leads to nonalcoholic steatohepatitis and could progress to cirrhosis. As HCC is among the most common cancers and occurs in the setting of chronic liver disease in most patients, screening the population at risk could help in early diagnosis and management, leading to improved survival. Screening for HCC is performed using biochemical marker testing such as α-fetoprotein (AFP) and cross-sectional imaging. It is critical to emphasize that HCC could potentially occur in patients without cirrhosis (non-cirrhotic HCC), which can account for almost 20% of all HCCs. The lack of cirrhosis can cause a delay in surveillance, which could potentially lead to diagnosis at a later stage, worsening the prognosis for such patients. In this article, we discuss the diagnosis of cirrhosis in at-risk populations with details on the different modalities available for screening HCC in patients with cirrhosis, emphasizing the role of abdominal ultrasounds, the primary imaging modality in HCC screening.

Ultrasound-guided percutaneous liver biopsy: A review of what operators need to know

Ultrasound-guided percutaneous liver biopsy (UG-PLB) is a commonly performed procedure for the diagnosis and monitoring of various liver diseases. The objective of this article is to present the most important information relating to UG-PLB from the perspective of interventional radiologists in a clear and concise fashion, referencing the most influential papers in current literature. This paper gives a brief overview of the history of the procedure and its conception, as well as the most common indications, contraindications, complications, and a technical overview of the most common techniques and equipment that are used by UG-PLB operators.

Added value of EUS-B-FNA to bronchoscopy and EBUS-TBNA in diagnosing and staging of lung cancer

Background

Bronchoscopy and EBUS are standard procedures in lung cancer work-up but have low diagnostic yield in lesions outside the central airways and hilar/mediastinal lymph nodes. Growing evidence on introducing the EBUS endoscope into the oesophagus (EUS-B) in the same session as bronchoscopy/EBUS gives access to new anatomical areas that can be safely biopsied.

Objective

To summarize the current evidence of the added value of EUS-B-FNA to bronchoscopy and EBUS-TBNA in lung cancer work-up.

Methods

A narrative review.

Results

Few randomized trials or prospective studies are available. Prospective studies show that add-on EUS-B-FNA increases diagnostic yield when sampling abnormal mediastinal lymph nodes, para-oesophageal lung and left adrenal gland. A large retrospective series on EUS-B-FNA from retroperitoneal lymph nodes suggests high diagnostic yield without safety concerns, as do casuistic reports on EUS-B-FNA from mediastinal pleural thickening, pancreatic lesions, ascites fluid and pericardial effusions. No study has systematically assessed both diagnostic yield, safety, patient reported outcomes, adverse events and costs.

Conclusion

The diagnostic value of add-on EUS-B to standard bronchoscopy and EBUS in lung cancer work-up appears very promising without safety concerns, giving the pulmonologist access to a variety of sites out of reach with other minimally invasive techniques. Little is known on patient-reported outcomes and costs. Future and prospective research should focus on effectiveness aspects to clarify whether overall benefits of add-on EUS-B sufficiently exceed overall downsides.

Endohepatology in clinical practice: EUS-guided portal pressure measurement combined with EUS-guided liver biopsy and variceal screening and treatment in outpatients

Background and Objectives

EUS-guided portal pressure gradient (PPG) is a novel technique that permits a true, direct measure of portal vein pressure and hepatic vein pressure. This article details our experience and lessons learned from 20 consecutive outpatient EUS-PPG procedures performed at a single center, along with simultaneous EUS-guided liver biopsy, variceal screening, and variceal banding.

Methods

Data on the first 20 patients who underwent EUS-PPG at a single center were retrospectively viewed and analyzed. The effects of various liver diseases or other patient-related factors on the clinical and technical success of EUS-PPG measurements, as well as EUS-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB), were evaluated. During the procedure, if esophageal varices were encountered, they were assessed, and if felt to be clinically indicated, endoscopic variceal ligation was performed.

Results

The 20 patients included 10 male and 10 female patients. All procedures were technically successful. In all patients, the portal vein and hepatic veins could be easily identified. One adverse event of bleeding occurred during the EUS-PPG measuring procedure. All 20 EUS-LBs were technically successful and yielded adequate samples for histological evaluations, with an average of 25 complete portal tracts per sample. Among patients with esophageal varices, 40% of patients underwent banding. The mean EUS-PPG among 5 patients with esophageal varices was 11.6 mm Hg, compared with 3.2 mm Hg among 15 patients without esophageal varices.

Conclusion

This study demonstrates that EUS-PPG is a novel, safe, reproducible, and effective technique. Also, the fact that EUS-PPG, EUS-LB, variceal screening, and variceal banding could be performed in 1 session and on an outpatient basis speaks to the growing relevance and impact of the nascent field of endohepatology.

Multiloculated Liver Abscess: A Complication of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Liver Biopsy

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided liver biopsy is gaining popularity for liver parenchymal sampling due to its detailed visualization of liver anatomy, precision in sampling, and the ability to combine liver biopsy with other endoscopic goals. In this study, we present a case involving an anatomically complex, immunocompromised patient who underwent EUS-guided liver biopsy. While the samples were sufficient and progressed the management of her autoimmune hepatitis, her course was complicated by a multiloculated liver abscess. EUS liver biopsy has an excellent safety profile, but a small risk of infection remains, especially in immunocompromised patients or those with preexisting biliary obstruction.

Comparison of diagnostic outcomes, safety, and cost of Franseen-tip 19G versus 22G needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsies

Background and study aims Favorable outcomes were noted with refinement in newer endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) needle tips. Still, the overall usefulness and benefit are yet to be well explored. Patients and methods This was a retrospective analysis of patients with EUS-LB (Franseen-tip 19G versus 22G FNB needle) over 2 years. EUS-LB was obtained in a one-pass, two-actuation, modified wet suction technique. Diagnostic yield, fragmentation rate, aggregate specimen length (AL), number of complete portal tracts (CPT), length of longest intact core (LIC), adverse events (AEs) (early), and cost of the procedure (1USD = 82 INR) were compared. Results Fifty-four patients (33 [61.1%], female) successfully underwent EUS-LB with a median age of 46 years (interquartile range [IQR] 34-54); the majority 32 (59.2%) underwent 19G biopsies. There was a significantly increased median (IQR) AL in the 19G compared with 22G (20 mm [19-21] vs. 15 [14-15], P < 0.001), respectively. Similarly, significantly lengthier median LIC and CPT were seen, respectively. A nonsignificant diagnostic yield was noted (100% vs. 90.9%, P = 0.082), respectively. The fragmentation rate was higher in 22G FNB needles (36.4% [95% CI 16-56] vs. 12.5% [95% CI 1-24], respectively; P = 0.038). Seven patients (12.9%) had mild AEs with no difference between groups. The average procedure cost with 19G was INR 63000 (768$), and with 22G needle was INR 54500 (664$). Conclusions The Franseen-tip 19G outperforms 22G with a significantly lower fragmentation rate, longer AL, LIC, and a higher number of CPT with a marginal increase in the procedure cost, without any difference in diagnostic yield and safety.

Interleukin-34 is more suitable than macrophage colony-stimulating factor for predicting liver significant fibrosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B

AIMS

Interleukin-34 (IL-34) and macrophage colony-stimulating factor (CSF-1) have similar functions, such as promoting the formation of liver fibrosis. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the diagnostic value of serum IL-34 and CSF-1 for significant liver fibrosis in patients with chronic hepatitis B (CHB).

METHODS

A total of 369 CHB patients, consisting of 208 HBeAg-negative patients and 161 HBeAg-positive patients, were enrolled in this study. Additionally, 72 healthy individuals served as healthy controls (HCs). Serum levels of IL-34 and CSF-1 were measured using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay method. Liver fibrosis grades were assessed using the modified Scheuer scoring system.

RESULTS

Serum IL-34 and CSF-1 levels exhibited significant elevation in both HBeAg-negative and HBeAg-positive patients in comparison to HCs (p < 0.001). IL-34 emerged as an independent factor linked to significant liver fibrosis, whereas CSF-1 did not exhibit such an association. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis indicated higher areas under the curves (AUCs) for IL-34 (0.814, p < 0.001 and 0.673, p < 0.001) when diagnosing significant liver fibrosis in HBeAg-negative and HBeAg-positive patients, respectively, as opposed to CSF-1 (0.602, p < 0.001; 0.619, p = 0.385). Within the HBeAg-negative patient subgroup, the AUC for IL-34 surpassed that of FIB-4 (p = 0.009) and APRI (p = 0.045).

CONCLUSION

Serum IL-34 has the potential to be a straightforward and practical biomarker that demonstrates superior performance to serum CSF-1 in the diagnosis of significant liver fibrosis in CHB patients, especially within the HBeAg-negative patients.

Role of endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition in diagnosing hepatic focal lesions

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has become an established method in diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in gastroenterology; however, it has recently gained a growing role in hepatology.

AIM

To evaluate the role of EUS features, strain elastography (SE), and EUS-tissue acquisition in diagnosing hepatic focal lesions (HFLs) that could affect further management.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study included 215 patients with pancreatic, biliary, or gastrointestinal malignancies referred for EUS examination. HFLs were identified in 43 patients (20%), and EUS-guided tissue acquisition was performed from these lesions.

RESULTS

EUS features were highly sensitive (100%) but much less specific (57%) in diagnosing HFLs; the overall accuracy was 94%. Real-time elastography was also very sensitive (97%) but less specific (67%) in diagnosing HFLs; however, the overall accuracy was 92%. EUS tissue acquisition was extremely sensitive (100%) and specific (100%), with a 100% overall diagnostic accuracy.

CONCLUSION

The diagnostic utility of EUS-guided tissue acquisition was extremely accurate in diagnosing HFLs. EUS characteristics and real-time SE accurately predicted the histological diagnosis of both benign and malignant HFLs.

Diagnostic efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy for diffuse liver diseases and its predictors - a multicentric retrospective analysis

AIM OF THE STUDY

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided liver biopsy (LB) has become an increasingly popular method of tissue acquisition for evaluating liver diseases. Despite its advantages, EUS-LB has not been widely adopted in clinical practice due to concerns regarding efficacy and safety. Present data on EUS-LB from India are scarce. We aimed to study the diagnostic outcome and safety of EUS-guided liver biopsy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively maintained data from January 2021 to October 2022 of consecutive patients undergoing EUS-LB at four tertiary care centers in India. The primary outcome was sample adequacy, while secondary outcomes were rate of successful pathological diagnoses and incidence of adverse events (AE).

RESULTS

A total of 74 patients (median age: 44.5 years, 50.0% males) were included. The majority of the patients underwent left-lobe biopsy (62/74, 83.7%), and a 19-G Franseen FNB needle was most commonly used (61/74, 82.4%). Wet heparin suction was used in most cases (60/74, 81.1%). There were five mild AEs observed (one case of self-limited bleeding and four cases of post-procedural pain). Adequate and optimal samples were obtained in 71 (95.9%) and 49 (66.2%) cases, with a conclusive diagnosis being made in 97.3% (72/74) of the patients. On multivariate analysis, the presence of ascites was a negative predictor of optimal sample (odds ratio [OR] = 0.128, 95% CI: 0.017-0.96).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-LB is a safe and viable alternative to percutaneous liver biopsy, achieving diagnosis in > 95% of cases. EUS-LB can be performed safely even in patients with mild ascites, although ascites reduces the chances of getting an optimal sample.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided portal pressure gradient measurement in managing portal hypertension

Portal hypertension (PH) is still a challenging clinical condition due to its silent manifestations in the early stage and needs to be measured accurately for early detection. Hepatic vein pressure gradient measurement has been considered as the gold standard measurement for PH; however, it needs special skill, experience, and high expertise. Recently, there has been an innovative development in using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for the diagnosis and management of liver diseases, including portal pressure measurement, which is commonly known as EUS-guided portal pressure gradient (EUS-PPG) measurement. EUS-PPG measurement can be performed concomitantly with EUS evaluation for deep esophageal varices, EUS-guided liver biopsy, and EUS-guided cyanoacrylate injection. However, there are still major issues, such as different etiologies of liver disease, procedural training, expertise, availability, and cost-effectiveness in several situations with regard to the standard management.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy using a single-pass, slow-pull technique with a 19-G Franseen tip fine-needle biopsy needle: A prospective study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) is considered to be safe and effective. Commonly a 19-G fine-needle aspiration or biopsy needle is used. But, the results vary with different techniques that are used. Herein, we report the results of liver biopsy with a single-pass, three actuations (1:3) using the slow-pull technique.

METHODS

In this prospective study, 50 consecutive patients with indications for liver biopsy underwent EUS-LB with a 19-gauge fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle from both right and left lobes. The primary outcome was the adequacy of the specimen for histological diagnosis. Total specimen length (TSL), longest specimen length (LSL), complete portal tracts (CPTs) and comparison of these outcomes between the left lobe and right lobe specimens were secondary outcomes. Adverse events (AEs) were also measured during this study.

RESULTS

Adequate tissue for histological diagnosis was obtained in all 50 patients (100%). The median number of CPTs was 32.5 (range, 11-58), while the median of TSL was 58 mm (range, 35-190) and the median LSL was 15 mm (range, 5-40). There was no significant difference in CPTs, TSL and LSL between left and right lobe biopsies. There was no major complication; one of the patients (2%) had bleed from the duodenal puncture site, which was managed endoscopically without the need for blood transfusion.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy using a 19-gauge Franseen tip needle with a single pass, three actuation (1:3) and slow-pull technique provides adequate tissue yield and has a good safety profile.

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.

Advances in Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-Guided Liver Biopsy

Recent years have seen the emergence of endoscopic-ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) as an effective alternative to traditional (percutaneous or transjugular) liver biopsy techniques. Comparative studies have demonstrated that both endoscopic and non-endoscopic approaches are similar in terms of diagnostic adequacy, accuracy, and adverse events; however, EUS-LB offers the advantage of reduced recovery time. Additionally, EUS-LB enables the sampling of both lobes of the liver as well as the advantage of portal pressure measurements. However, EUS-LB may be argued to have a high cost, although this procedure can be cost-effective if bundled with other endoscopic procedures. Approaches utilizing EUS-guided liver therapy, such as the administration of chemotherapeutic agents and EUS elastography, are in development, and their optimal integration into clinical care is likely to emerge in the coming years. In the present review, we evaluate the available literature on EUS-LB indications, contraindications, variations in needle biopsy techniques, comparative outcomes, advantages and disadvantages, and future trends and perspectives.

Diagnostic and interventional EUS in hepatology: An updated review

EUS has become an increasingly used diagnostic and therapeutic modality in the armamentarium of endoscopists. With ever-expanding indications, EUS is being used in patients with liver disease, for both diagnosis and therapy. EUS is playing an important role in providing additional important information to that provided by cross-sectional imaging modalities such as computerized tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Domains of therapy that were largely restricted to interventional radiologists have become accessible to endosonologists. From liver biopsy and sampling of liver lesions to ablative therapy for liver lesions and vascular interventions for varices, there is increased use of EUS in patients with liver disease. In this review, we discuss the various diagnostic and therapeutic applications of EUS in patients with various liver diseases.

Diagnostic Performance of Transient Elastography Versus Two-Dimensional Shear Wave Elastography for Liver Fibrosis in Chronic Viral Hepatitis: Direct Comparison and a Meta-Analysis

Objective

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of transient elastography (TE) and two-dimensional shear wave elastography (2D-SWE) for staging liver fibrosis in patients with chronic viral hepatitis (CVH).

Methods

Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched (-01/08/2021) for studies comparing TE with 2D-SWE in patients with CVH. Other etiologies of chronic liver disease (CLD) and articles not published in SCI journals were excluded. The bivariate random-effects model was used to pool the performance of the TE and 2D-SWE.

Results

Eight articles with a total of 1301 CVH patients were included. The prevalence of significant fibrosis (fibrosis stage ≥ 2), advanced fibrosis (fibrosis stage ≥ 3), and cirrhosis was 50.8%, 44.8%, and 34.7%, respectively. 2D-SWE expressed higher overall accuracy than TE in detecting significant fibrosis (0.93 vs. 0.85, P = 0.04). No significant difference among the overall diagnostic accuracy of TE and 2D-SWE in staging advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis was found.

Conclusion

TE and 2D-SWE express good to excellent diagnostic accuracies to stage fibrosis in CVH patients. 2D-SWE compares favorably with TE especially for predicting significant fibrosis.

Update on endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy

Endoscopic ultrasound guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) has emerged as a minimally-invasive alternative to the traditional (percutaneous or transjugular) liver biopsy techniques for the diagnosis of liver parenchymal diseases. Po-tentially, EUS-LB combines the advantages of percutaneous and transjugular liver biopsy in addressing focused sampling in addition to measuring portal pressure. Additionally, EUS-LB facilitates access to both the lobes of the liver which is not considered with the traditional percutaneous liver biopsy. Multiple studies have compared EUS-LB with conventional liver biopsy and reported comparable diagnostic yield, increased acquisition of complete portal tracts, and longer specimen length as compared to the traditional approaches. EUS-LB is associated with lesser post-procedural pain and shorter recovery time, while providing lower risk of complications when compared to traditional liver biopsy. Innovations in needle types, needle sizes and suction techniques have aimed at further optimizing the EUS-LB technique. This review article updates current literature with focus on the variations in the technique and equipment used for EUS-LB, and compares EUS-LB with traditional methods of liver biopsy.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Liver Biopsy in Clinical Practice

Background and Aims

Liver biopsies are traditionally performed using percutaneous, transjugular, or surgical approaches. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided liver biopsy is a new modality to sample liver parenchyma. This technique allows sampling of both liver lobes and obviates the need for sampling error. However, there is paucity of literature demonstrating that EUS-guided liver biopsy provides adequate tissue sample for histologic analysis. This study aimed to review the experience of 2 large tertiary care centers to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of EUS-guided liver biopsy.

Methods

All patients undergoing EUS-guided liver biopsy between March 2018 and October 2019 between 2 tertiary care centers were included in this retrospective study. The main outcomes of the study included technical success of EUS-guided liver biopsy, details of the specimen (length of the specimen, number of complete portal tracts), and adverse events of EUS-guided liver biopsy.

Results

A total of 229 patients underwent EUS-guided liver biopsy at the 2 tertiary care centers. There was 100% technical success. Of the 229 patients, 226 patients (98.7%) had adequate tissue for histopathological evaluation with a mean total length of 3.20 cm and complete portal tracts of 20.2. Overall, 2.6% of patients had adverse events.

Conclusion

Our study illustrates that EUS-guided liver biopsy provides adequate specimen for histologic analysis and is a safe, viable alternative to other methods of liver biopsy.

EUS-guided transhepatic biliary drainage: a large single-center U.S. experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy has been performed for many years with most published experience from outside the United States. The luminal access point can be from the esophagus, stomach, duodenum, or jejunum; biliary access can be either into the right or left intrahepatic system. Thus, we prefer the term EUS-guided transhepatic biliary drainage (ETBD). We describe what is believed to be the largest single-center U.S. experience of ETBD for management of benign and malignant biliary disease.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of all ETBD conducted by 1 endoscopist between September 2014 and May 2021.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifteen patients underwent attempted ETBD: 85 for benign disease and 130 for malignant disease. Ninety-two patients (43%) had surgically altered anatomy (SAA). In 94 patients previously endoscopic attempts failed. The approach was transesophageal in 9, transgastric in 188, transduodenal in 5, and transjejunal in 5 patients. In 1 patient a bilateral approach was used. Standard fully covered self-expandable stents of 4- to 10-cm lengths and 8- or 10-mm diameters were used. Technical success was 95.3% and clinical success was 87.25%. Forty patients (18.6%) experienced adverse events (13 mild, 21 moderate, and 6 severe according to the modified American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy lexicon). Mean follow-up was 257.31 ± 308.11 days for all patients (124.53 ± 229.86 days for benign disease and 457.27 ± 466.31 days for malignant disease). Seventy-four patients (34.4%) had died at the time of data collection (66 in the malignant cohort, 8 in the benign cohort). Of those with malignancy surviving >6 months, 17.4% required reintervention.

CONCLUSIONS

ETBD is effective in the management of benign and malignant biliary obstruction for patients with SAA as well as native anatomy, with a modest adverse event rate.

OUP accepted manuscript

Background

This study aimed to assess the performance of transient elastography (TE), two-dimensional shear wave elastography (2D-SWE), and magnetic resonance elastography (MRE) for staging significant fibrosis and cirrhosis in untreated chronic hepatitis B (CHB) patients.

Methods

Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched for terms involving CHB, TE, 2D-SWE, and MRE. Other etiologies of chronic liver disease, previous treatment in patients, or articles not published in SCI journals were excluded. Hierarchical non-linear models were used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of TE, 2D-SWE, and MRE. Heterogeneity was explored via analysis of threshold effect and meta-regression.

Results

Twenty-eight articles with a total of 4,540 untreated CHB patients were included. The summary areas under the receiver-operating characteristic curves (AUROCs) using TE, 2D-SWE, and MRE for predicting significant fibrosis (SF) were 0.84, 0.89, and 0.99, respectively. The AUROC values of TE, 2D-SWE, and MRE for staging cirrhosis were 0.9, 0.94, and 0.99, respectively. Based on the meta-analysis of studies with head-to-head comparison, 2D-SWE is superior to TE (0.92 vs 0.85, P < 0.01) in staging significant fibrosis.

Conclusion

TE, 2D-SWE, and MRE express acceptable diagnostic accuracies in staging significant fibrosis and cirrhosis in untreated CHB patients. 2D-SWE outperforms TE in detecting significant fibrosis in treatment-naive people with hepatitis B virus.

Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Liver Disease: Where Do We Stand?

As the burden of liver disease in the general populace steadily increases, so does the need for both advanced diagnostic and treatment options. Endoscopic ultrasound is a reliable diagnostic and therapeutic method that has an established role, foremost in pancreatobiliary pathology. This paper aims to summarize the growing role of endoscopic ultrasound in hepatology based on the search of the current literature. A number of applications of endoscopic ultrasound are reviewed, including both noninvasive methods and tissue acquisition in focal and diffuse liver disease, portal hypertension measurement, detection and management of gastric and esophageal varices, treatment of focal liver lesions and staging of pancreatobiliary malignancies, treatment of cystic and solid liver lesions, as well as liver abscess drainage. Both hepatologists and endoscopists should be aware of the evolving role of endoscopic ultrasound in liver disease. The inherent invasive nature of endoscopic examination limits its use to a targeted population identified using noninvasive methods. Endoscopic ultrasound is one the most versatile methods in gastroenterology, allowing immediate access with detection, sampling, and treatment of digestive tract pathology. Further expansion of its use in hepatology is immanent.

Endo-hepatology: An emerging field

Gastroenterologists have long been spearheading the care of patients with various forms of liver disease. The diagnosis and management of liver disease has traditionally been a combination of clinical, laboratory, and imaging findings coupled with percutaneous and intravascular procedures with endoscopy largely limited to screening for and therapy of esophageal and gastric varices. As the applications of diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) have evolved, it has found a particular niche within hepatology now coined endo-hepatology. Here we discuss several EUS-guided procedures such as liver biopsy, shear wave elastography, direct portal pressure measurement, paracentesis, as well as EUS-guided therapies for variceal hemorrhage.

A Rare Cause of Chronic Liver Disease Diagnosed by Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Liver Biopsy

Patient: Male, 54-year-old

Final Diagnosis: Hepatic hemosiderosis

Symptoms: Elevated liver enzymes

Medication:—

Clinical Procedure: Liver biopsy

Specialty: Gastroenterology and Hepatology • Hematology

The Role of Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound in Liver Diseases: What Have We Learnt?

Chronic liver disease (CLD) is still a major problem, where the disease progression will lead to liver cirrhosis (LC) or hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Portal hypertension (PH) management and loco-regional therapy for HCC have become the cornerstones in advanced liver disease management. Recently, there are studies looking at the potential role of interventional endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in liver diseases. EUS may be useful in vascular changes of the digestive wall evaluation, performing dynamic assessment of hemodynamic changes, predicting variceal bleeding and rebleeding risk, and assessing the pharmacological effects. In PH management, EUS-guided vascular therapy-which revolves around glue injection, endovascular coil placement/embolization, and combination of both-has shown promising results. As a diagnostic modality for liver cancer, the implementation of EUS in liver diseases is currently not only limited to liver biopsy (EUS-LB) but also in shear-wave elastography (SWE) and portal pressure gradient measurement, as well as portal vein sampling. The application of EUS-guided radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) and tumor injection can also overcome the limitations shown by both modalities without EUS. Nevertheless, establishing EUS as a firm diagnostic and therapeutic modality is still challenging since the performance of interventional EUS requires high expertise and adequate facilities.

Non-cirrhotic hepatocellular carcinoma in chronic viral hepatitis: Current insights and advancements

Primary liver cancers carry significant morbidity and mortality. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) develops within the hepatic parenchyma and is the most common malignancy originating from the liver. Although 80% of HCCs develop within background cirrhosis, 20% may arise in a non-cirrhotic milieu and are referred to non-cirrhotic-HCC (NCHCC). NCHCC is often diagnosed late due to lack of surveillance. In addition, the rising prevalence of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and diabetes mellitus have increased the risk of developing HCC on non-cirrhotic patients. Viral infections such as chronic Hepatitis B and less often chronic hepatitis C with advance fibrosis are associated with NCHCC. NCHCC individuals may have Hepatitis B core antibodies and occult HBV infection, signifying the role of Hepatitis B infection in NCHCC. Given the effectiveness of current antiviral therapies, surgical techniques and locoregional treatment options, nowadays such patients have more options and potential for cure. However, these lesions need early identification with diagnostic models and multiple surveillance strategies to improve overall outcomes. Better understanding of the NCHCC risk factors, tumorigenesis, diagnostic tools and treatment options are critical to improving prognosis and overall outcomes on these patients. In this review, we aim to discuss NCHCC epidemiology, risk factors, and pathogenesis, and elaborate on NCHCC diagnosis and treatment strategies.

Interobserver Reliability of the Endoscopic Ultrasound Criteria for the Diagnosis of Early Chronic Pancreatitis: Comparison between the 2009 and 2019 Japanese Diagnostic Criteria

In 2009, diagnostic criteria for early chronic pancreatitis (DCECP2009) were proposed by the Japan Pancreas Society. This study aimed to evaluate the interobserver reliability (IOR) of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) criteria for diagnosis of early chronic pancreatitis (ECP) between DCECP2009 and 2019 diagnostic criteria for ECP (DCECP2019) to assess the validity of the revision from the perspective of EUS findings. Among patients who underwent a detailed observation of the pancreas by EUS at our institution between January 2018 and March 2019, EUS images of 97 patients were extracted. Images were reviewed by 12 gastrointestinal endoscopy experts (eight pancreatologists, group A and four nonpancreatologists, group B). The overall kappa (K)-values for the IOR of the DCECP2009 EUS criteria were 0.424 and 0.563:0.231 for groups A:B, whereas the overall K-values for the DCECP2019 criteria were 0.618, and 0.733:0.442 for groups A:B. Regarding changes in the final diagnosis of ECP based on clinical features and EUS findings, 20 cases were definite ECP, 53 were probable ECP, and 24 were normal according to DCECP2009. In contrast, seven were definite ECP, 19 were probable ECP, and 71 were normal according to DECEP2019. IOR of DCECP2019 was higher than that of DCECP2009, which indicates an improvement in precision.

Feasibility and Safety of Transjugular Liver Biopsy for Japanese Patients with Chronic Liver Diseases

Background and study aim: Transjugular liver biopsy (TJLB) can be used in patients who are ineligible for percutaneous liver biopsy (PLB) with acute and chronic hepatic disease. This study aimed to evaluate the usefulness and safety of TJLB in patients who were not indicated for PLB. Methods: Between July 2014 and February 2019, a total of 134 patients underwent liver biopsies at our institution. Among these, PLB was performed in 110 patients and TJLB in 24 patients. A retrospective comparison of clinical results in these patients was then performed. The primary endpoints of this study were the utility and safety of TJLB in patients who were not indicated for PLB. Results: The procedural success rate was 100% in both groups. The clinical response rate and the effective tissue sampling rate were 100% in the TJLB group and 97% in the PLB group (p = 0.55). There was no difference in the number of portal fields examined retrospectively between the two groups. No serious adverse events were observed in either group. Conclusions: It is suggested that TJLB is useful because it can be safely performed in patients with poor general condition who are not indicated for PLB.

Comparative Study of an Ultrasound-guided Percutaneous Biopsy and Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine-needle Aspiration for Liver Tumors

Objective Both a percutaneous biopsy and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) have been widely performed for liver tumors. However, no studies have compared these two biopsy methods. Method A retrospective study was conducted using medical records for patients who underwent a liver tumor biopsy from 2012 to 2019. The cases were classified into two groups for a comparison: an ultrasound-guided percutaneous biopsy group (percutaneous group) and an EUS-FNA group (EUS group). Results A total of 106 patients (47 in the percutaneous group and 59 in the EUS group) were included. The final diagnosis was malignant in 100 cases and benign in the remaining 6 cases. While the median lesion diameter was 62 mm in the percutaneous group, it was significantly smaller (34 mm) in the EUS group (p <0.01). The EUS group had more left lobe tumors than right lobe tumors. All cases of caudate lobe tumor (four cases) underwent EUS-FNA. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the procedure were 95%, 100%, and 96% in the percutaneous group and 100%, 100%, and 100% in the EUS group, respectively showing no significant difference. Adverse events were reported in 17% of the percutaneous group, which was significantly lower than in the EUS group (2%; p <0.01). Conclusion A percutaneous biopsy and EUS-FNA have equivalent diagnostic qualities for liver tumors, although EUS-FNA tends to be associated with fewer adverse events. A complete understanding of the characteristics of each procedure is essential when choosing the best biopsy method for each particular case.

Safety and adequacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided random liver biopsy in comparison with transjugular and percutaneous approaches

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) is an accepted technique for tissue acquisition. Traditionally, random LB has been performed with percutaneous (PC-LB) and transjugular (TJ-LB) approaches. The purpose of this study was to compare the safety profile and efficacy of EUS-LB, PC-LB, and TJ-LB. Patients and methods  A retrospective analysis was performed at a tertiary academic medical center. Inclusion criteria for analysis were all adult patients who underwent EUS-LB since inception and TJ-LB/PC-LB over a 3-year span (June 2016 to June 2019). The primary outcome assessed was any adverse events. Secondary outcomes included technical success resulting in tissue acquisition and diagnostic adequacy of the sample for histologic analysis. Results  A total of 513 patients were included for analysis. There were 135 EUS-LB, 287 PC-LB, and 91 TJ-LB. The most common indication for LB was abnormal liver function tests. For the primary outcome, the rate of adverse events was low with five reported (< 1 %). There were two in the EUS-LB group, two in the PC-LB group, and one in TJ-LB group, and this difference was not statistically significant ( P  = 0.585). The technical success rate was 100 % in each group. The rate of diagnostic adequacy was 100 % in TJ-LB group and 99 % in both EUS-LB and PC-LB groups. This difference was not statistically significant ( P  = 1.000). The most common histologic finding was non-specific changes (33.7 %) followed by non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (15.60 %). Conclusion  In comparison with PC-LB and TJ-LB, EUS-LB has comparable safety profile, technical success rate, and diagnostic adequacy. EUS-LB should be considered as an option for random liver biopsy.

The Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound for Esophageal Varices

Esophageal varices are caused by the development of collateral circulation in the esophagus as a result of portal hypertension. It is important to administer appropriate preventive treatment because bleeding varices can be fatal. Esophageal varices have complex and diverse hemodynamics, and there are various variations for each case. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) can estimate the hemodynamics of each case. Therefore, observation by EUS in esophageal varices provides useful information, such as safe and effective treatment selection, prediction of recurrence, and appropriate follow-up after treatment. Although treatment for the esophagogastric varices can be performed without EUS imaging, understanding the local hemodynamics of the varices using EUS prior to treatment will lead to more safe and effective treatment. EUS observation is an indispensable tool for thorough variceal care.

A Comprehensive Narrative Review on the Evolving Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Focal Solid Liver Lesions Diagnosis and Management

The implications of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) have expanded considerably in recent years to cover more fields in invasive gastroenterology practice, as both an investigative and therapeutic modality. The utility of EUS in the diagnosis and management of focal liver lesions has gained a special attractiveness recently. The EUS probe proximity to the liver and its excellent spatial resolution enables real-time images coupled with several enhancement techniques, such as contrast-enhanced (CE) EUS. Aside from its notable capability to execute targeted biopsies and therapeutic interventions, EUS has developed into a hopeful therapeutic tool for the management of solid liver lesions. Herein, we provide a comprehensive state-of-the-art review on the efficacy and safety of EUS in the diagnosis and management of focal solid liver lesions. Medline/PubMed and Embase database searches were conducted by two separate authors (T.K. and W.S.), all relevant studies were assessed, and relevant data was extracted and fully reported. EUS-guided diagnosis of focal liver lesions by sonographic morphologic appearance and cytological and histopathological finding of biopsies obtained via fine needle aspiration/biopsy have been shown to significantly improve the diagnosis of solid liver lesions compared with traditional imaging tools. Similarly, EUS-guided treatment has been shown to consistently have excellent technical success, high efficacy, and minor adverse events. The evolving valuable evidences of EUS utility might satisfy the unmet need of optimizing management of focal solid liver lesions.