Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy of patients with suspected pancreatic cancer: diagnostic accuracy and acute and 30-day complications

Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound guided 22-gauge core needle with standard 25-gauge fine-needle aspiration for diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions

Background and Objectives:

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is the standard modality for diagnosing pancreatic masses. We compared the diagnostic yield of a new EUS-guided 22-gauge core needle biopsy to a standard 25-gauge FNA in sampling the same pancreatic lesions during the same EUS.

Patients and Methods:

The main outcomes of the study were the sample adequacy of each method to provide a final pathological diagnosis, and the concordance in diagnosis between core and FNA specimens. The secondary outcomes were the sensitivity and specificity of the findings for each needle and the incremental yield of using both needles compared with using each needle alone.

Results:

A total of 56 patients with 61 solid pancreatic lesions were evaluated. The mean number of passes with FNA was 3.5 (ranges 1-8) and with core biopsy needle was 1.7 (ranges 1-5). The proportions of adequate samples were 50/61 (81.9%) for FNA and 45/61 (73.8%) for core biopsy (P = 0.37). The diagnostic yield was 46/61 (75.4%), 42/61 (68.9%) and 47/61 (77.1%) for FNA, core, and both, respectively. There was a substantial agreement of 87.5% (κ = 0.77; P < 0.001) in the findings of core and FNA specimens. The sensitivity for the diagnosis of malignancy for FNA and core biopsy were 68.1% and 59.6%, respectively (P = no significant [NS]). The specificity was 100% for both methods. The incremental increase in sensitivity and specificity by combining both methods are 1.5% and 0%, respectively.

Conclusion:

There are NS differences in the diagnostic yield between EUS-guided 22-gauge core biopsy and standard 25-gauge FNA for diagnosing pancreatic lesions, but core biopsy required fewer numbers of passes. There was NS incremental diagnostic yield when using both needles during the same procedure.

[Autoimmune pancreatitis. Evidence based management guidelines of the Hungarian Pancreatic Study Group]

Autoimmune pancreatitis is a rare disease which can even mimic pancreatic tumor, however, unlike the latter, it requires not surgical but conservative management. Correct diagnosis and differential diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis and treatment of these patients requires up-to-date and evidence based management guidelines. The Hungarian Pancreatic Study Group proposed to prepare an evidence based guideline based on the available international guidelines and evidences. The preparatory and consultation task force appointed by the Hungarian Pancreatic Study Group translated and complemented and/or modified the international guidelines if it was necessary. 29 relevant clinical questions in 4 topics were defined (Basics; Diagnosis; Differential diagnostics; Therapy). Evidence was classified according to the UpToDate(®) grading system. The draft of the guidelines was presented and discussed at the consensus meeting on September 12, 2014. All clinial questions were accepted with almost total (more than 95%) agreement. The present guideline is the first evidence based autoimmune pancreatitis guideline in Hungary. The guideline may provide very important and helpful data for tuition of autoimmune pancreatitis, for everyday practice and for establishing proper finance. Therefore, the authors believe that these guidelines will widely become a basic reference in Hungary.

Differentiation of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma from other neoplastic solid pancreatic lesions: a tertiary oncology center experience

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNET), and metastatic lesions (pMET) are the most common neoplastic solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs). Early diagnosis enables prompt treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To identify factors differentiating PDAC from non-PDAC lesions and assess the accuracy of EUS-guided FNA.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Retrospective tertiary center.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTION

Consecutive patients referred for EUS evaluation of SPLs from 2004 to 2011.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Pretest (preceding EUS-guided FNA [EUS-FNA]) predictors of PDAC among neoplastic SPLs and accuracy of EUS-FNA.

RESULTS

A total of 1333 EUS scans with 1108 EUS-FNAs were performed for pancreatic lesions. Of the 672 patients with neoplastic SPLs, 528 had PDAC and 144 non-PDAC. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and accuracy of EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of PDAC were 97.3%, 99.3%, 99.8%, and 97.8%, respectively. Years of EUS experience significantly correlated with fewer needle passes (Rs = -0.18, P < .001). Controlling for all potential confounders, multivariable regression analysis demonstrated that patients with PDAC compared with pNETs and pMETs were older (odds ratio [OR] 4.42; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-9.5; P < .001), had weight loss (OR 3.0; 95% CI, 1.6-5.4; P < .001), hyperbilirubinemia (OR 3.7; 95% CI, 1.8-7.5; P < .001), elevated CA19-9 (OR 6.9; 95% CI, 2.4-20.3; P < .01), evidence of arterial invasion (OR 6.5; 95% CI, 2.7-15.4; P < .001), and PD dilation (OR 3.3; 95% CI, 1.8-5.9; P < .001).

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective design, single center.

CONCLUSIONS

When evaluating neoplastic SPLs, demographic, clinical, laboratory, and imaging characteristics can reliably discern and suggest PDAC. In addition, EUS-FNA is exceedingly sensitive and specific for PDAC.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided therapies in pancreatic neoplasms

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has evolved from being primarily a diagnostic modality into an interventional endoscopic tool for the management of both benign and malignant gastrointestinal illnesses. EUS-guided therapy has garnered particular interest as a minimally invasive approach for the treatment of pancreatic cancer, a disease often complicated by its aggressive course and poor survival. The potential advantage of an EUS-guided approach revolves around real-time imaging for targeted therapy of a difficult to reach organ. In this review, we focus on EUS-guided therapies for pancreatic neoplasms.

Trans-organ versus trans-mesenteric computed tomography-guided percutaneous fine-needle aspiration biopsy of pancreatic masses: feasibility and safety

AIM

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of computed tomography (CT)-guided percutaneous fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) of pancreatic masses that traverses the gastrointestinal tract or solid viscera.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From January 2002 to December 2012, 144 patients underwent 165 CT-guided biopsies of pancreatic masses. Biopsies were performed using a 21 or 22 G needle. Cytology reports, medical records, and procedure details for all patients were retrospectively reviewed to evaluate the biopsy route, complications, and diagnostic accuracy.

RESULTS

Trans-organ biopsies of pancreatic masses were safely performed via a direct pathway traversing the stomach (n = 45), colon (n = 14), jejunum (n = 4), or liver (n = 5). There were five self-limiting mesenteric haematomas along the biopsy route on immediate post-procedure CT and all patients remained asymptomatic. All haematomas occurred after a trans-mesenteric approach rather than passage through abdominal organs. Three patients had acute pancreatitis. There was no significant difference in complications and diagnostic yields between the groups. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of final FNAB cytology for malignancy were 98.3%, 100%, 100% and 71.4%, respectively. The overall accuracy was 98.4%.

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous FNAB using the trans-organ approach is a safe and effective technique to diagnose pancreatic malignancy.

Predictors of malignancy in patients with suspicious or indeterminate cytology on pancreatic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration: a multivariate model

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate predictors of malignancy in pancreatic lesions with suspicious or indeterminate endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) cytology.

METHODS

Suspicious/indeterminate EUS-FNA cytology was identified from our database. Stable imaging, benign pathology, or survival for 12 months after EUS-FNA was considered benign. Diagnosis of malignancy was based on positive pathology, local invasion/metastasis on imaging, or death within 12 months from cancer-associated causes. Univariate analysis was performed to compare variables between benign and malignant lesions. Multivariate analysis (covariates: age [<70 or ≥70], appearance [solid/cystic], size [<20 or ≥20 mm], and serum CA19-9 [<40 or ≥40]) was performed using binary logistic regression.

RESULTS

There were 81 patients with suspicious or indeterminate cytology. Final diagnosis was cancer in 55 (67.9%) of 81 (adenocarcinoma in 40/81 [49.4%], "other neoplasms" in 15/81 [18.5%]) and benign in 26 (32.1%) of 81. Univariate analysis revealed a difference in age, lesion size, solid/cystic characteristics, and serum CA 19-9 between benign and malignant lesions. Only elevated serum CA 19-9 was independently associated with a diagnosis of malignancy on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Age, lesion size, and solid/cystic characteristics on EUS were not independently associated with cancer. Pancreatic lesions with suspicious/indeterminate cytology and elevated serum CA 19-9 should be considered as concerning for a malignant diagnosis.

Can endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration offer clinical benefit for thick-walled gallbladders?

BACKGROUND

No previous studies have compared cytology obtained under endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGD) and EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for thick-walled gallbladders.

AIM

The present study investigated the diagnostic yield of bile cytology under ETGD and EUS-FNA for gallbladder tumors.

METHODS

A total of 69 patients were diagnosed as having gallbladder wall thickening. Among these patients, 28 patients were diagnosed by clinical follow-up, solely by imaging such as computed tomography or by histological examination of surgical specimens. The remaining 41 patients underwent ETGD and/or EUS-FNA. In these 41 patients, the clinical data collected included gender, age, diameter of gallbladder wall, site of gallbladder wall thickening, final diagnosis, adverse events, and diagnostic yield of ETGD and EUS-FNA.

RESULTS

Cyto-histological diagnosis with EUS-FNA was higher than that with ETGD, with a sensitivity of 100 versus 71%, specificity of 100 versus 94%, and accuracy of 100 versus 88%, respectively, in the two groups. In addition, the sampling adequacy of EUS-FNA was 100%. Adverse events were seen in five patients in the ETGD group (mild pancreatitis), although no adverse events were seen in the EUS-FNA group (P = 0.08).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that EUS-FNA can be safely performed for the diagnosis of gallbladder lesions. Further, this procedure may be the diagnostic method of choice over cytology of bile juice obtained via ETGD to obtain histological evidence of gallbladder cancer.

Expression of KOC, S100P, mesothelin and MUC1 in pancreatico-biliary adenocarcinomas: development and utility of a potential diagnostic immunohistochemistry panel

BACKGROUND

Pancreatico-biliary adenocarcinomas (PBA) have a poor prognosis. Diagnosis is usually achieved by imaging and/or endoscopy with confirmatory cytology. Cytological interpretation can be difficult especially in the setting of chronic pancreatitis/cholangitis. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) biomarkers could act as an adjunct to cytology to improve the diagnosis. Thus, we performed a meta-analysis and selected KOC, S100P, mesothelin and MUC1 for further validation in PBA resection specimens.

METHODS

Tissue microarrays containing tumour and normal cores in a ratio of 3:2, from 99 surgically resected PBA patients, were used for IHC. IHC was performed on an automated platform using antibodies against KOC, S100P, mesothelin and MUC1. Tissue cores were scored for staining intensity and proportion of tissue stained using a Histoscore method (range, 0-300). Sensitivity and specificity for individual biomarkers, as well as biomarker panels, were determined with different cut-offs for positivity and compared by summary receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

RESULTS

The expression of all four biomarkers was high in PBA versus normal ducts, with a mean Histoscore of 150 vs. 0.4 for KOC, 165 vs. 0.3 for S100P, 115 vs. 0.5 for mesothelin and 200 vs. 14 for MUC1 (p < .0001 for all comparisons). Five cut-offs were carefully chosen for sensitivity/specificity analysis. Four of these cut-offs, namely 5%, 10% or 20% positive cells and Histoscore 20 were identified using ROC curve analysis and the fifth cut-off was moderate-strong staining intensity. Using 20% positive cells as a cut-off achieved higher sensitivity/specificity values: KOC 84%/100%; S100P 83%/100%; mesothelin 88%/92%; and MUC1 89%/63%. Analysis of a panel of KOC, S100P and mesothelin achieved 100% sensitivity and 99% specificity if at least 2 biomarkers were positive for 10% cut-off; and 100% sensitivity and specificity for 20% cut-off.

CONCLUSION

A biomarker panel of KOC, S100P and mesothelin with at least 2 biomarkers positive was found to be an optimum panel with both 10% and 20% cut-offs in resection specimens from patients with PBA.

Basic techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for solid lesions: Adverse events and avoiding them

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is often the preferred technique for tissue acquisition in the diagnosis of suspected intrathoracic and intraabdominal pathology. Although EUS FNA is a safe and accurate procedure, it has been associated with a low risk of adverse events. The unique properties of the echoendoscope and its ability to acquire tissue outside of the gastrointestinal lumen impart risks that are not associated with routine endoscopic procedures. In this review, we discuss the risk of perforation related to the echoendoscope itself and adverse events related to FNA of solid masses including infections, bleeding, pancreatitis and pancreatic duct leak, bile duct leak and tumor seeding. We also provide tips on how to avoid the most common adverse events related to EUS-FNA.

When to puncture, when not to puncture: Pancreatic masses

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has evolved to become a crucial tool for the evaluation of pancreatic diseases, among them solid pancreatic lesions. However, its ability to determine whether a lesion is malignant or not is difficult to establish based only in the endosonographic image. EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) allows obtaining a cytological and/or histological sample from pancreatic lesions, with a high overall accuracy and low complication rates. Although the clinical usefulness of EUS-FNA for pancreatic diseases is widely accepted, the indications for tissue diagnosis of pancreatic lesions suspected to be malignant is still controversial. This review highlights the diagnostic accuracy and complications of EUS-FNA, focusing on its current indications.

Can elastography replace fine needle aspiration?

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is one of the best diagnostic methods for diseases of the digestive tract and surrounding organs. Whereas EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) has been very useful for providing histological confirmation for previously hard to reach lesions, elastography is aiming to obtain a “virtual biopsy” by assessing differences in elasticity between the normal and pathological – usually malignant – tissue. A question that arises is whether EUS-elastography has reached a stage where it might successfully supplant the use of EUS-FNA in some of its clinical indications. The main indications of EUS-guided FNA are listed in this article and published data on the usage of elastography in these settings is reviewed for each one. In some of the indications, a plethora of studies have been published, notably for the evaluation of solid pancreatic masses and lymph nodes, while in others there is little relevant data (submucosal masses, left liver lesions, left adrenal masses), or elastography simply is not suitable as a diagnostic means (cystic lesions). Our conclusion is that elastography is not yet ready to replace EUS-FNA in its indications, but should complement it in various settings, especially for the assessment of lymph nodes. It can only be considered an alternative on a case-by-case basis, in situations where FNA is regarded as a contraindication. Furthermore, it could be used in conjunction with other imaging techniques, such as contrast-enhanced EUS, in order to further improve the accuracy of non-invasive EUS assessment, possibly making the case for a more limited or targeted use of EUS-FNA in selected cases.

Comparison of ERCP, EUS, and ERCP combined with EUS in diagnosing pancreatic neoplasms: a systematic review and meta-analysis

In the current study, we performed a systematic review of literature pertaining to the diagnostic value of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), and combined ERCP plus EUS to pancreatic cancer. We searched MEDLINE, OVID, and the Cochrane Library for studies evaluating diagnostic validity of ERCP, EUS, and ERCP plus EUS between January 1989 and May 2014. We obtained pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, and summary receiver operating characteristic curves (SROC). A total of 10 studies that included 669 patients who fulfilled all of the inclusion criteria were considered for inclusion in the analysis. The pooled sensitivities of EUS, ERCP, and EUS plus ERCP were 76.7, 57.9, and 79.9 %, respectively. The pooled specificities were 91.7, 90.6, and 94.2 %, respectively. The *Q index estimates were 0.828, 0.862, and 0.896, respectively. The *Q indices for EUS and EUS plus ERCP were significantly higher compared with ERCP (P = 0.010 and 0.008, respectively). Our meta-analysis showed that ERCP plus EUS was associated with a high diagnostic value for the detection of pancreatic neoplasms compared with ERCP and EUS alone.

Standardized terminology and nomenclature for pancreatobiliary cytology: The Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology Guidelines

The Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology has developed a set of guidelines for pancreatobiliary cytology including indications for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) biopsy, techniques of EUS-FNA, terminology and nomenclature of pancreatobiliary disease, ancillary testing and post-biopsy treatment and management. All documents are based on the expertise of the authors, a review of the literature, discussion of the draft document at several national and international meetings over an 18 month period and synthesis of online comments of the draft document on the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology web site [www.papsociety.org]. This document selectively presents the results of these discussions and focuses on a proposed standardized terminology scheme for pancreatobiliary specimens that correlate cytological diagnosis with biological behavior and increasingly conservative patient management of surveillance only. The proposed terminology scheme recommends a six-tiered system: Non-diagnostic, negative, atypical, neoplastic [benign or other], suspicious and positive. Unique to this scheme is the “neoplastic” category separated into “benign” (serous cystadenoma) or “other” (premalignant mucinous cysts, neuroendocrine tumors and solid-pseudopapillary neoplasms (SPNs)). The positive or malignant category is reserved for high-grade, aggressive malignancies including ductal adenocarcinoma, acinar cell carcinoma, poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas, pancreatoblastoma, lymphoma and metastases. Interpretation categories do not have to be used. Some pathology laboratory information systems require an interpretation category, which places the cytological diagnosis into a general category. This proposed scheme provides terminology that standardizes the category of the various diseases of the pancreas, some of which are difficult to diagnose specifically by cytology. In addition, this terminology scheme attempts to provide maximum flexibility for patient management, which has become increasingly conservative for some neoplasms.

Randomized controlled trial comparing stylet-free endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration with 22-G and 25-G needles

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Previous studies comparing endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) results with different gauge needles have all been carried out with the stylet in place and show no clear advantage to the larger 22-G needle. Similar data for stylet-free EUS-FNA (SF-EUS-FNA) are unavailable. The aim of the present study was to determine whether diagnostic yield and specimen adequacy is superior with the 22-G needle as compared to the 25-G needle.

METHODS

All patients ≥ 18 years referred for solid-lesion EUS-FNA were eligible. Patients with suspected diagnosis of lymphoma, gastrointestinal stromal tumor, sarcoidosis, significant coagulopathy (international normalized ratio > 1.5 or platelets < 50000/mm(3)), use of clopidogrel within 7 days of EUS, and pregnancy were excluded. The two needles were compared regarding diagnostic yield, sample adequacy, bloodiness, ease of puncture, visibility, number of passes, failures, and complications.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty consecutive patients were included and 126 lesions were sampled. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value for the 22-G SF-EUS-FNA were 83%, 100%, 100% and 56%, respectively, and for the 25-G SF-EUS-FNA were 88.8%, 100%, 100% and 76.5%, respectively (P=NS). There were no significant differences between the 22-G and the 25-G FNA needles in sample adequacy, bloodiness, ease of puncture, FNA failure, visibility, number of passes and complications; and no significant differences between either needle were found in relation to lesion site.

CONCLUSION

For SF-EUS-FNA, the larger 22-G needle offers no advantage over the smaller 25-G needle.

Cancer statistics: current diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer in Shanghai, China

A multi-center population-based study in Shanghai, China was performed to explore the implications for the management of pancreatic cancer by comparing diagnosis and survival rates. Novel imaging modalities including MRI (13.9%), PET/CT (1.8%), and EUS (5.6%) were not widely used in our population. Only 39.7% of cases were histologically verified (surgery with histologic diagnosis 31.0%, cytological diagnosis 8.7%, surgery without histologic diagnosis 12.1%, and clinical diagnosis 48.2%). Overall, 30.0% of patients underwent curative-intent operation, and only 9.8% of patients received comprehensive treatment. The prognosis of pancreatic cancer patients was significantly better for patients who were treated in high-volume centers than in low-volume centers. We propose that more effort should be put on novel diagnostic modalities, histological confirmation, and comprehensive treatment in China. Multidisciplinary teams specialized in pancreatic cancer therapy in high-volume centers are urgently needed.

Guidelines for pancreaticobiliary cytology from the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology: A review

The newest installment on state-of-the-art standards of practice in cytopathology from the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology (PSC) focuses on the pancreaticobiliary system. Similar to the National Cancer Institute recommendations for aspiration cytology of the thyroid, the PSC guidelines for pancreaticobiliary cytology addresses indications, techniques, terminology and nomenclature, ancillary studies, and postprocedure management. Each committee was composed of a multidisciplinary group of experts in diagnosing, managing, and treating patients with pancreaticobiliary disease. Draft documents were posted on an interactive Web-based forum hosted by the PSC Web site (www.papsociety.org) and the topics of terminology, ancillary testing, and management were presented at national and international meetings over an 18-month period for discussion and feedback from practicing pathologists around the world. This review provides a synopsis of these guidelines.

Promising outcomes of screening for pancreatic cancer by genetic testing and endoscopic ultrasound

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine if screening patients based on certain cancer syndromes or family history criteria can lead to early detection of pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

This was a cohort study from 2008 to 2011 at a large tertiary referral center. A total of 30 patients met high-risk criteria after genetic counseling and were referred to a gastroenterologist for possible endoscopic ultrasound (EUS).

RESULTS

Of the 30 patients, 16 underwent EUS. Subsequently, 3 patients had fine needle aspiration. Two patients had pancreatic adenocarcinoma, and 1 patient had an intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm with low-grade dysplasia. The 2 patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma both had breast cancer and BRCA2 mutations. The patient with the intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm had Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. All 3 patients underwent surgery and have remained cancer free.

CONCLUSIONS

Genetic risk assessment with EUS +/- fine needle aspiration in high-risk patients may lead to earlier detection of pancreatic cancer and potentially improve overall morbidity and mortality. Greater emphasis should be placed on screening patients for hereditary cancer syndromes that increase the risk of pancreatic cancer.

Impact of rapid on-site evaluation on the adequacy of endoscopic-ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) has the potential to improve adequacy rates for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of solid pancreatic lesions, but its impact is context-dependent. No studies exist that summarize the relationship between ROSE, number of needle passes, and resulting adequacy rates.

AIMS

To analyze data from previous studies to establish if ROSE is associated with improved adequacy rates; to evaluate the relationship between ROSE, number of needle passes, and the resulting adequacy rates of EUS-FNA for solid pancreatic lesions.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting the adequacy rates for EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic lesions.

RESULTS

The search produced 3822 original studies, of which 70 studies met our inclusion criteria. The overall average adequacy rate was 96.2% (95% confidence interval: 95.5, 96.9). ROSE was associated with a statistically significant improvement of up to 3.5% in adequacy rates. There was heterogeneity in adequacy rates across all subgroups. No association between the assessor type and adequacy rates was found. Studies with ROSE have high per-case adequacy and a relatively high number of needle passes in contrast to non-ROSE studies. ROSE is an effect modifier of the relationship between number of needle passes and adequacy.

CONCLUSIONS

ROSE is associated with up to 3.5% improvement in adequacy rates for EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic lesions. ROSE assessor type has no impact on adequacy rates. ROSE is an effect modifier on the relationship between needle passes and per-case adequacy for EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic lesions.

Current options for the diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis

The diagnostic options for chronic pancreatitis have evolved over recent years. The previous gold standard references for structural imaging and exocrine pancreatic function testing have both been supplanted and redesigned. Endoscopic retrograde pancreatography has now been overtaken by endoscopic ultrasound and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography, whilst the old technique for Dreiling tube pancreatic function testing has now been replaced by the endoscopic pancreatic function test. New advances in endoscopic ultrasound elastography have also extended the options for evaluating pancreatic masses to differentiate mass-forming chronic pancreatitis from malignancy. Genetic contribution to chronic pancreatitis is also now more widely recognized than ever before.

Significance of the diagnostic categories "atypical" and "suspicious for malignancy" in the cytologic diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses

Endoscopic ultrasound guided (EUS) fine-needle aspiration (FNA) investigation of solid pancreatic lesions has been shown to have good sensitivity and specificity. Many lesions can be definitely classified as benign or malignant but some can only be cytologically classified as "atypical" or "suspicious for malignancy". Risk for malignancy in these indeterminate categories has not been well categorized. The cytology records of four University Medical centers were searched for all EUS guided FNAs of solid pancreatic lesions. All cases with a diagnosis of "atypical", or "suspicious for malignancy" were selected for analysis when histologic biopsy or over 18 months clinical follow-up was available. Two hundred and ninety-two cases with a diagnosis of "atypical" or "suspicious for malignancy" and adequate follow-up were obtained from the combined data of the four institutions. The percentage malignant for the categories "atypical" and "suspicious for malignancy" were 79.2 and 96.3%, respectively. If the category "atypical" was classified as benign and "suspicious for malignancy" was classified as malignant, the resulting positive predictive value was 96.3 (95% CI: 92.6-98.5) and the negative predictive value 20.8 (95% CI: 13.4-30.0). The categories of "atypical" and "suspicious for malignancy" stratify risk for malignancy in a fashion, which may aid in patient counseling and selection of follow-up protocols. Classification of "suspicious for malignancy" as malignant optimizes diagnostic sensitivity and specificity.

Standardized terminology and nomenclature for pancreatobiliary cytology: the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology guidelines

The Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology has developed a set of guidelines for pancreatobiliary cytology including indications for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) biopsy, techniques of EUS-FNA, terminology and nomenclature of pancreatobiliary disease, ancillary testing, and postbiopsy treatment and management. All documents are based on the expertise of the authors, a review of the literature, discussions of the draft document at several national and international meetings over an 18-month period and synthesis of online comments of the draft document on the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology web site (www.papsociety.org). This document selectively presents the results of these discussions and focuses on a proposed standardized terminology scheme for pancreatobiliary specimens that correlate cytological diagnosis with biological behavior and increasingly conservative patient management of surveillance only. The proposed terminology scheme recommends a six-tiered system: Nondiagnostic, Negative, Atypical, Neoplastic (benign or other), Suspicious and Positive. Unique to this scheme is the "Neoplastic" category separated into "benign" (serous cystadenoma), or "Other" (premalignant mucinous cysts, neuroendocrine tumors, and solid-pseudopapillary neoplasms). The positive or malignant category is reserved for high-grade, aggressive malignancies including ductal adenocarcinoma, acinar cell carcinoma, poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinomas, pancreatoblastoma, lymphoma, and metastases. Interpretation categories do not have to be used. Some pathology laboratory information systems require an interpretation category, which places the cytological diagnosis into a general category. This proposed scheme provides terminology that standardizes the category of the various diseases of the pancreas, some of which are difficult to diagnose specifically by cytology. In addition, this terminology scheme attempts to provide maximum flexibility for patient management, which has become increasingly conservative for some neoplasms.

Capture, release and culture of circulating tumor cells from pancreatic cancer patients using an enhanced mixing chip

Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) from peripheral blood hold important information for cancer diagnosis and disease monitoring. Analysis of this "liquid biopsy" holds the promise to usher in a new era of personalized therapeutic treatments and real-time monitoring for cancer patients. But the extreme rarity of CTCs in blood makes their isolation and characterization technologically challenging. This paper reports the development of a geometrically enhanced mixing (GEM) chip for high-efficiency and high-purity tumor cell capture. We also successfully demonstrated the release and culture of the captured tumor cells, as well as the isolation of CTCs from cancer patients. The high-performance microchip is based on geometrically optimized micromixer structures, which enhance the transverse flow and flow folding, maximizing the interaction between CTCs and antibody-coated surfaces. With the optimized channel geometry and flow rate, the capture efficiency reached >90% with a purity of >84% when capturing spiked tumor cells in buffer. The system was further validated by isolating a wide range of spiked tumor cells (50-50,000) in 1 mL of lysed blood and whole blood. With the combination of trypsinization and high flow rate washing, captured tumor cells were efficiently released. The released cells were viable and able to proliferate, and showed no difference compared with intact cells that were not subjected to the capture and release process. Furthermore, we applied the device for detecting CTCs from metastatic pancreatic cancer patients' blood; and CTCs were found from 17 out of 18 samples (>94%). We also tested the potential utility of the device in monitoring the response to anti-cancer drug treatment in pancreatic cancer patients, and the CTC numbers correlated with the clinical computed tomograms (CT scans) of tumors. The presented technology shows great promise for accurate CTC enumeration, biological studies of CTCs and cancer metastasis, as well as for cancer diagnosis and treatment monitoring.

Poor 'real-life' negative predictive value of cross-sectional imaging in obstructive jaundice

BACKGROUND

Cross-sectional imaging remains the first-line test for obstructive jaundice despite high miss rates for pancreatobiliary tumours. Improvements in resolution and slice thickness of spiral computed tomography⁄magnetic resonance imaging⁄magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography promised to increase accuracy.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether the post-test probability of neoplasm is truly altered by the presence or absence of a mass on computed tomography⁄magnetic resonance imaging in obstructive jaundice.

METHODS

The institutional endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) database was retrospectively reviewed to stratify patients presenting to EUS over a two-year period for obstructive jaundice (suspicious for malignancy) according to their pre-EUS imaging results. The primary analysis involved the calculation of the positive predictive value and negative predictive value (NPV) of imaging with 95% binomial CIs. Test performance of EUS⁄fine-needle aspiration (FNA) was also calculated. Final diagnosis was determined by positive cytology⁄histology; negative EUS was supplemented by clinical follow-up.

RESULTS

The positive predictive value (n = 51) and NPV (n = 53) of pre-EUS imaging was 98% (95% CI 90% to 100%) and 9% (95% CI 3% to 21%), respectively (accuracy 53%), with post-test suspicion of malignancy similar between imaging-positive and -negative groups. EUS demonstrated a mass in 96% of imaging-positive cases versus 85% in imaging-negative cases (exact P = 0.09). Malignant or suspicious FNA cytology was obtained with EUS in 92% of the imaging-positive group, and 62% of the imaging-negative group (75% of subgroup with FNA) (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Lack of a definite mass on pre-EUS imaging had low NPV, and was clearly not sufficiently accurate or reassuring in this clinical setting. In suspicious obstructive jaundice, EUS with FNA has a high diagnostic yield regardless of the findings of pre-EUS cross-sectional imaging and, as such, EUS may be a more reasonable first-line test in this high-suspicion setting.

Malignancy risk associated with diagnostic categories defined by the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology pancreaticobiliary guidelines

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is currently the predominant method for obtaining a preoperative tissue diagnosis for pancreatic lesions suspicious for malignancy. The diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of EUS-FNA are well documented, but malignancy risk associated with the diagnostic categories proposed by the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology is poorly defined.

METHODS

The records of the Departments of Pathology at Duke University and the University of Utah were searched for all cases of EUS-FNA performed for the investigation of pancreatic lesions. All cases with follow-up surgical diagnosis or greater than 3 years of clinical follow-up were selected. Cytologic diagnostic categories were "nondiagnostic," "benign," "atypical (not otherwise specified)," "suspicious for malignancy," "neoplasm," and "malignant." Correlation of cytologic diagnosis with surgical and/or clinical follow-up was made and risk of malignancy calculated for each category.

RESULTS

Three hundred seventeen EUS-FNAs with adequate surgical or clinical follow-up were obtained. Risk of malignancy for nondiagnostic specimens was 21%;, benign specimens, 13%; atypical cases, 74%; suspicious for malignancy, 82%; the neoplasm category, 14%; and the malignant category, 97%

CONCLUSIONS

The cytologic categories proposed by the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology demonstrate an increasing risk for malignancy extending from benign to malignant. Aspirates designated benign have the lowest risk of malignancy (13%) and aspirates designated malignant the highest (97%). The proposed categorization scheme stratifies risk for malignancy giving useful information to clinicians treating patients with pancreatic lesions.

Severe bleeding and perforation are rare complications of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for pancreatic masses: an analysis of 3,090 patients from 212 hospitals

Background/Aims

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is useful for the pathological diagnosis of pancreatic masses, but patients are susceptible to severe bleeding and perforation. Because the incidence and severity of these complications have not been fully evaluated.

Methods

We aimed to evaluate severe bleeding and perforation after EUS-FNA for pancreatic masses using large-scale data derived from a Japanese nationwide administrative database.

Results

In total, 3,090 consecutive patients from 212 low- to high-volume hospitals were analyzed. Severe bleeding requiring transfusion or endoscopic treatment occurred in seven patients (0.23%), and no perforation was observed. No patient mortality was recorded within 30 days of EUS-FNA. The rate of severe bleeding in low-volume hospitals was significantly higher than that in medium- and high-volume hospitals (0.48% vs 0.10%, p=0.045).

Conclusions

Severe bleeding and perforation following EUS-FNA for pancreatic masses are rare, and the procedure is safe.

Factors affecting the yield of endoscopic transpapillary bile duct biopsy for the diagnosis of pancreatic head cancer

BACKGROUND

Transpapillary biliary biopsy (TBB) is a simple endoscopic technique that can be performed during an initial biliary drainage session. This procedure has the potential to reduce the load of another tissue sampling in cases of pancreatic head cancer (PHC) with biliary stricture. The aim of this study is to identify factors associated with a positive outcome using TBB for PHC.

METHODS

In total, 130 cases that underwent TBB for investigation of distal biliary stricture were included [62 cases of PHC, 36 cases of distal biliary cancer (DBC), and 32 cases of benign biliary stricture (BBS)]. Factors affecting the diagnostic efficiency of TBB were determined using univariate and multivariate logistic analyses.

RESULTS

Cancer tissue was obtained in 31 cases (50%) of PHC and 33 cases (91.7%) of DBC. Multivariable analysis showed that ≧10 mg/dl of serum bilirubin level (odds ratio [OR]: 5.58; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.29-28.20; P = 0.021) and ≧3 tissue samplings (OR: 3.59; 95% CI: 1.02-14.27, P = 0.046) were independent factors affecting cancer-positive rate in cases of PHC. In >90% of resected cases of PHC, cancer involved the left side of the biliary mucosa and the range of cancer invasion (≧2/3 of circumference of biliary mucosa) was also a significant factor (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

PHC showing high level of serum bilirubin (>10 mg/dl) and high circumferential proportion of bile duct invasion (>2/3 judging from MDCT) is a good indication for biliary biopsy. Targeting the left-side wall and ≧3 tissue samplings will lead to the higher sensitivity.

Clinical controversies in endoscopic ultrasound

The field of diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is growing rapidly. Although EUS has enhanced our ability to diagnose and treat a wide variety of GI conditions, there are many controversial issues regarding the appropriate application of EUS techniques. In this review we discuss five controversial topics in EUS: the utility of EUS in staging of esophageal and gastric cancer; selection of appropriate needle gauge for fine needle aspiration (FNA); use of the stylet in FNA; and the emerging role of contrast agents in endoscopic ultrasound.

Patients with obstructive jaundice and biliary stricture ± mass lesion on imaging: prevalence of malignancy and potential role of EUS-FNA

BACKGROUND

In patients with obstructive jaundice and biliary stricture, the role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is debated for fear of missing a potentially resectable pancreatobiliary malignancy (PBM). We evaluated the prevalence of (1) PBM; (2) lesions that do not require a potentially curative cancer surgery; and (3) potentially resectable PBMs in patients with false-negative diagnosis by EUS-FNA.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of 342 patients who underwent EUS/EUS-FNA from 2002 to 2009 after presenting with obstructive jaundice and a biliary stricture. Of these, 170 patients had no definitive mass on computed tomography and 172 patients had definitive mass on computed tomography without evidence of unresectability. Final diagnosis was based on surgical pathology or definitive cytology and clinical follow-up of ≥ 12 months.

RESULTS

The mean age of patients (176 male) was 68.0±12.5 years. A final diagnosis of malignancy was made in only 248 patients (72.5%; 95% confidence interval, 67.7, 77.2). The overall accuracy of EUS-FNA for diagnosing malignancy was 92.4% (89.0, 94.8), with 91.5% sensitivity (87.1, 94.5) and 80.9% negative predictive value (72.0, 87.5). Among 21 patients with false-negative diagnosis, 8 had cholangiocarcinoma (2 resectable), 13 had pancreatic cancer (5 resectable). EUS-FNA provided information to potentially modify surgical management in 116 patients (33.9%; 95% confidence interval, 29.1, 39.0): 89 patients diagnosed as true negatives, 24 with distant malignant lymphadenopathy, and 3 with malignant lymphoma.

CONCLUSIONS

In above-defined patient subset, the risk of missing resectable tumors by EUS-FNA has been exaggerated because of artifactually low negative predictive value resulting from a high pretest probability of PBM. The actual miss rate for resectable PBM by EUS-FNA is rather small and was 2% in present cohort. Information from EUS-FNA can potentially modify surgical management in up to one third of patients.

Health resource utilization and multidisciplinary impact of endoscopic ultrasonography in a tertiary referral medical center

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is a resource-intensive endoscopic procedure, but may result in high downstream health resource utilization and multispecialty impact. Our aim was to examine the downstream impact of EUS by specialty and by indication.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed at an academic medical center for patients for whom EUS represented the first point of contact at the study institution within a 20-month period.

RESULTS

A total of 552 EUS procedures were reviewed and 208 represented the first point of contact. The most common principle indication involved the pancreas (n = 117, 56%). Downstream health utilization was calculated for an average of 313 days postprocedure (range: 35-632 days). Following unique referral for endoscopic ultrasound, 52% of the patients in the study were retained within the institution for further management and, of these, 34% had a major intervention in the form of surgery or chemoradiotherapy. Compared with other indications, patients presenting with a pancreatic mass were significantly more likely to remain in the study institution for further management (62% versus 39%, p = 0.005), were more likely to have a downstream surgery (29% versus 14%, p = 0.020) and were more likely to have downstream chemo-radiotherapy (11% versus 3%, p = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS represents a unique portal of entry into tertiary referral medical centers. First point of contact EUS referrals are associated with major downstream health resource utilization and significantly increased utilization for mass lesions of the pancreas.

A prospective, comparative trial to optimize sampling techniques in EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses

BACKGROUND

There is no standardization of the use of suction during puncturing of a target in pancreatic EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA). It is also debatable whether expressing aspirates from the needle by the traditional method of reinserting the stylet is more effective than by air flushing, which is easier and safer.

OBJECTIVE

To optimize sampling techniques in pancreatic EUS-FNA.

DESIGN

Prospective, comparative trial.

SETTING

Tertiary-care referral center.

PATIENTS

Eighty-one consecutive patients with solid pancreatic masses.

INTERVENTION

Four punctures were performed for each mass in random order by a 2 × 2 factorial design. Sample quality and diagnostic yield were compared between samples with suction (S+) versus no suction (S-) and expressed by reinserting the stylet (RS) versus air flushing (AF).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Sample quality by the number of diagnostic samples, cellularity, bloodiness, and air-drying artifact; diagnostic yield by accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity.

RESULTS

The number of diagnostic samples (72.8% vs 58.6%; P = .001), cellularity (odds ratio [OR] 2.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.37-3.30; P < .001), bloodiness (OR 1.46; CI, 1.28-1.68; P < .001), accuracy (85.2% vs 75.9%; P = .004), and sensitivity (82.4% vs 72.1%; P = .005) were higher in S+ than in S-. Bloodiness was lower in AF than in RS (OR 1.16; CI, 1.03-1.30; P = .017).

LIMITATIONS

Single-center trial, 2 kinds of needle gauges, and no immediate cytopathology evaluation.

CONCLUSION

Puncturing with suction and expressing by air flushing may be used preferentially in pancreatic EUS-FNA because they were more effective and convenient techniques. (

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01354795.).

Ratio of pancreatic duct caliber to width of pancreatic gland by endosonography is predictive of pancreatic cancer

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to determine whether (1) a pancreatic duct (PD) diameter to pancreatic gland width (G) ratio (PDG) by endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) predicts pancreatic cancer (PC) and (2) whether this ratio better indicates PC compared to PD dilation alone.

METHODS

Patients presenting for EUS were classified into the following 4 categories: (1) normal, (2) noncalcific chronic pancreatitis (NCCP), (3) calcific CP (CCP), and (4) PC.

RESULTS

There were 198 patients enrolled. Final diagnoses were PC (n = 34), CCP (n = 16), and normal/NCCP (n = 148). The median PD diameter (8, 5, and 2 mm, respectively; P = <0.001), G (16, 20, and 17 mm, respectively; P = 0.002), and PDG ratio were significantly different among groups (0.54, 0.25, and 0.12, respectively; P < 0.001). Patients with PC were more likely to have a PDG ratio of greater than or equal to 0.34 compared to CCP, and normal/NCCP groups (94%, 19%, 1.3%, respectively; P < 0.001). The positive predictive value, negative predictive value, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of PDG greater than or equal to 0.34 for detecting cancer were 87%, 99%, 94%, 97%, and 97%, respectively. The accuracy and positive predictive value of PD dilation alone for diagnosing PC were 83% and 50%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

A PDG ratio is a good predictor of PC and is better than PD dilation. This sign should be routinely used by endosonographers to improve EUS diagnostic capability of PC.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy of pancreatic metastases: a large single-center experience

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to describe a single-center experience with endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) features as well as the diagnostic role and clinical impact of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and Trucut biopsy (EUS-TCB) in patients with pancreatic metastases.

METHODS

Demographic, clinical, EUS, pathological, clinical outcome, and follow-up data of patients who underwent EUS at our institution between October 1998 and March 2010 for a known or suspected pancreatic metastasis were abstracted.

RESULTS

Forty-nine patients (23 males; median age, 63 years; range 30-83 years) with 72 pancreatic masses were identified. Primary tumor sites included kidney (21), lung (8), skin (6), colon (4), breast (3), small bowel (2), stomach (2), liver (1), ovary (1), and bladder (1). Of the 72 pancreatic lesions, EUS-FNA of 49 was performed (median, 4.1 passes; range, 2-9 passes) without complications. An EUS-TCB after EUS-FNA was performed in 2 patients and confirmed renal cell carcinoma in one and was nondiagnostic in one. The EUS-FNA provided the first diagnosis of "recurrent malignancy" in all the 44 patients at a median time of 65 months (range, 1-348 months) after diagnosis of the primary tumor.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic ultrasound-FNA and EUS-TCB may assist with the cytological diagnosis of pancreatic metastases and may have a major clinical impact.

Diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

EUS-FNA of pancreatic lesion has been put into clinical use widely in many centers. The present meta-analysis was conducted to study the diagnostic role of EUS-FNA in pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

A comprehensive review of study on the precision of EUS-FNA in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. A random effects model was used to pool the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). A summary receiver-operating characteristic (SROC) was constructed to summarize the overall test performance.

RESULTS

Thirty-one articles were eligible for the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR and DOR of EUS-FNA in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer were 0.89 (95% CI: 0.88-0.90), 0.96 (95% CI: 0.95-0.97), 16.88 (95% CI: 10.63-26.79), 0.13 (95%CI: 0.10-0.16) and 150.80 (95%CI: 95.94-237.03) respectively. In subgroup meta-analysis of the prospective studies, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR and DOR were 0.91 (95% CI: 0.90-0.93), 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91-0.96), 11.19 (95% CI: 6.36-19.69), 0.10 (95% CI: 0.07-0.15) and 125.22 (62.37-251.41). The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.97, indicating a good performance of overall accuracy.

CONCLUSION

EUS-FNA has the high sensitivity and specificity in differentiating pancreatic cancer. Moreover, it is also a safe diagnostic modality with little complications.

One- and two-step self-expandable metal stent placement for distal malignant biliary obstruction: a propensity analysis

BACKGROUND

Although self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) are widely used for distal malignant biliary obstruction, one-step SEMS (direct placement without a prior plastic stent) and two-step SEMS (placement at second endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography [ERCP] following plastic stent placement) have not been fully compared.

METHODS

In this multicenter retrospective study, patients were included who underwent first-time endoscopic SEMS placement between September 1994 and December 2010. We compared the one-step and two-step strategies using a propensity analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 370 patients were identified and one-step SEMS was performed in 59 patients. After adjustment using propensity scores, the median times to dysfunction were 116 and 219 days, respectively, for one-step and two-step SEMS (P = 0.058). Stent migration was more frequently observed in one-step SEMS as compared with two-step SEMS (25 vs. 11 %, P = 0.031). In one-step SEMS, the number of days of hospitalization associated with first-time SEMS placement was shorter compared with that in two-step SEMS (21 vs. 30 days, P = 0.001), and the total costs of SEMS-related interventions within 6 months were lower (6510 and 8100 USD, P = 0.004). The pathological diagnosis rates for pancreatic and biliary tract cancer at initial ERCP were 52 and 61 %. After failed diagnosis at initial ERCP, pathological diagnosis rates for pancreatic cancer were 32 versus 76 % (P = 0.005) by repeated ERCP versus endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA).

CONCLUSIONS

One-step SEMS was associated with increased stent migration, despite having potential cost-effectiveness. The additional yield of pathological diagnosis at repeated ERCP was low compared with that yielded by EUS-guided FNA.

Which patients with dilated common bile and/or pancreatic ducts have positive findings on EUS?

BACKGROUND

Patients with dilated common bile duct (CBD) (>7mm) and/or pancreatic duct (PD) on abdominal imaging are often referred for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). In many cases, the EUS shows no obvious etiology for the dilated ducts.

OBJECTIVE

Find clinical factors that may predict which patients are more likely to have positive findings on EUS to explain the etiologies for the dilated ducts.

DESIGN

Retrospective database analysis.

SETTING

Tertiary-care university hospital.

PATIENTS

Patients referred for EUS for dilated CBD and/or PD from January 2004 to February 2010 were included in this study. Only patients without an obvious etiology for the dilated ducts on abdominal imaging were included.

INTERVENTIONS

An EUS was performed by using either a radial echoendoscope or a linear endoscope to evaluate the common bile duct and/or the pancreatic duct. When appropriate fine needle aspiration of the mass or cyst was performed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

The characteristics of patients who had positive findings on EUS to explain the etiology of their dilated PD and/or CBD.

RESULTS

A total of 140 patients were included in the study with a mean age of 64 years, 51 (36%) male and 115 (82%) white. The majority of our patients had a presenting symptom of abdominal pain 105 (75%). 49 (36%) had elevated AST or ALT, 25 (8%) had an elevated bilirubin and 13 (23%) had an elevated lipase. EUS findings explained the dilated ducts in 54 (39%) of our patients, most common diagnoses included: CBD stone in 11 (8%), non-calcific chronic pancreatitis in 9 (6%), pancreatic mass in 8 (6%), IPMN in 7 (5%). On bivarate analysis patients who were older (p = 0.006), male (p = 0.001), had elevated LFTs (p = <0.001), had elevated lipase (p = 0.021) or had dilated CBD and PD (p = 0.007) were more likely to have an etiology for their dilated duct(s) discovered on EUS.

LIMITATIONS

A retrospective study with a small number of patients.

CONCLUSION

Older patients, males and those patients presenting with concurrent elevations in the AST/ALT and/or lipase were more likely to have an underlying etiology discovered on EUS. Furthermore, EUS may detect an undiagnosed pancreatic malignancy in patients presenting with unexplained duct dilation.

Diagnostic endoscopic ultrasonography: Assessment of safety and prevention of complications

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has gained wide acceptance as an important, minimally invasive diagnostic tool in gastroenterology, pulmonology, visceral surgery and oncology. This review focuses on data regarding risks and complications of non-interventional diagnostic EUS and EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB). Measures to improve the safety of EUS und EUS-FNB will be discussed. Due to the specific mechanical properties of echoendoscopes in EUS, there is a low but noteworthy risk of perforation. To minimize this risk, endoscopists should be familiar with the specific features of their equipment and their patients’ specific anatomical situations (e.g., tumor stenosis, diverticula). Most diagnostic EUS complications occur during EUS-FNB. Pain, acute pancreatitis, infection and bleeding are the primary adverse effects, occurring in 1% to 2% of patients. Only a few cases of needle tract seeding and peritoneal dissemination have been reported. The mortality associated with EUS and EUS-FNB is 0.02%. The risks associated with EUS-FNB are affected by endoscopist experience and target lesion. EUS-FNB of cystic lesions is associated with an increased risk of infection and hemorrhage. Peri-interventional antibiotics are recommended to prevent cyst infection. Adequate education and training, as well consideration of contraindications, are essential to minimize the risks of EUS and EUS-FNB. Restricting EUS-FNB only to patients in whom the cytopathological results may be expected to change the course of management is the best way of reducing the number of complications.

Diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for solid pancreatic lesion: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To summarize EUS-FNA test performance in suspected pancreatic malignancy with meta-analysis.

METHOD

Two reviewers searched MEDLINE (PubMed and Ovid from January 2002 to January 2012) database to identify relevant studies. The reference lists of the trials were manually searched. Included studies used histopathology or clinical and morphological (CT and MRI and US) follow-up as the "gold standard" and provided sufficient data to construct a diagnostic 2 × 2 table. A statistical program of Meta-Disc was used to calculate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive LR, negative LR, DOR, and the SROC curve. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression were calculated to evaluate potential sources of heterogeneity.

RESULT

A total of 15 studies with 1860 patients were included for the analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of EUS-FNA were 92 % (95 % CI = 91-93 %, p < 0.001, I (2) = 69.6 %) and 96 % (95 % CI = 93-98 %, p = 0.006, I (2) = 54.9 %), respectively. The positive LR and negative LR were 14.24 (95 % CI = 7.78-26.07) and 0.09 (95 % CI = 0.07-0.13), respectively. The area under the curve was 0.974. The subgroup analysis of six studies with rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) showed a pooled sensitivity of 95 % (95 % CI = 93-96 %), with p value equal 0.622 and I (2) = 0. The sensitivity analysis of ten high-quality studies (a score of ≥4) showed a pooled sensitivity of 94 % (95 % CI = 93-96 %, p = 0.144, I (2) = 33.1 %), and the pooled specificity was 0.95 (95 % CI, 0.91-0.97).

CONCLUSION

EUS-FNA had overall excellent specificity and sensitivity in accurately diagnosing solid pancreatic masses. ROSE could help to improve the accuracy of diagnostic test.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in the differentiation of type 1 and type 2 autoimmune pancreatitis

AIM

To investigate the usefulness of endoscopic ultra-sound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in the differentiation of autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 47 of 56 AIP patients who underwent EUS-FNA and met the Asian diagnostic criteria. On 47 EUS-FNA specimens, we evaluated the presence of adequate material and characteristic features of lymphoplasmacytic sclerosing pancreatitis (LPSP) and idiopathic duct-centric pancreatitis (IDCP) mentioned in the International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria and examined if these findings make a contribution to the differential diagnosis of type 1 and type 2 AIP. A disposable 22-gauge needle was used for EUS-FNA.

RESULTS

Adequate specimens including pancreatic tissue for differentiating AIP from cancer were obtained from 43 of 47 patients who underwent EUS-FNA. EUS-FNA was performed from the pancreatic head in 21 cases, which is known to be technically difficult when performed by core biopsy; there was no significant difference in the results compared with pancreatic body-tail. Nine of 47 patients met level 1 findings of LPSP and 5 patients met level 2 findings of LPSP. No one met level 1 findings of IDCP, but 3 patients met level 2 findings of IDCP. Of 10 seronegative cases, 2 cases were diagnosed with "definitive type 1 AIP", and 3 cases were diagnosed with "probable type 2 AIP" when considering both the level 2 histological findings and response to steroids.

CONCLUSION

EUS-FNA is useful in the differentiation of type 1 and type 2 AIP, particularly in seronegative cases.

Incidence of hyperamylasemia after endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic lesions: a multicenter study from China

OBJECTIVES

There have been few reports regarding the incidence of hyperamylasemia after endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). In particular, the potential risk factors involved in the development of hyperamylasemia have not been analyzed owing to the small number of cases reported. The aim of this study was to evaluate hyperamylasemia and associated risk factors after EUS-FNA of a large sample of pancreatic lesions.

METHODS

Patients who underwent EUS-FNA for treatment of a pancreatic lesion were recruited from 6 medical centers in China.

RESULTS

A total of 1023 patients presenting with pancreatic lesions between January 2004 and June 2008 were enrolled in this study, with 48 (4.7%) of the 1023 patients presenting with hyperamylasemia 3 hours after the procedure. These patients had a mean ± SD serum amylase level of 331.64 ± 138.60 UI/L. With the use of unconditional logistic regression analysis, the incidence of hyperamylasemia was found to be affected by the type of cystic lesion present and the gauge of the needle used. In 4 (0.4%) of the 1023 patients, acute pancreatitis developed.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall incidence of hyperamylasemia after EUS-FNA is relatively low. However, the type of cystic lesion present and the gauge of the needle (19G) used for EUS-FNA may represent risk factors for the incidence of hyperamylasemia.

Direct histological processing of EUS biopsies enables rapid molecular biomarker analysis for interventional pancreatic cancer trials

OBJECTIVE

Current practice to diagnose pancreatic cancer is accomplished by endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) using a cytological approach. This method is time consuming and often fails to provide suitable specimens for modern molecular analyses. Here, we compare the cytological approach with direct formalin fixation of pancreatic EUS-FNA micro-cores and evaluate the potential to perform molecular biomarker analysis on these specimen.

METHODS

130 specimens obtained by EUS-FNA with a 22G needle were processed by the standard cytological approach and compared to a separate cohort of 130 specimens that were immediately formalin fixed to preserve micro-cores of tissue prior to routine histological processing.

RESULTS

We found that direct formalin fixation significantly shortened the time required for diagnosis from 3.6 days to 2.9 days (p<0.05) by reducing the average time (140 vs 33 min/case) and number of slides (9.65 vs 4.67 slides/case) for histopathological processing. Specificity and sensitivity yielded comparable results between the two approaches (82.3% vs 77% and 90.9% vs 100%). Importantly, EUS-FNA histology preserved the tumour tissue architecture with neoplastic glands embedded in stroma in 67.89% of diagnostic cases compared to 27.55% with the standard cytological approach (p < 0.001). Furthermore, micro-core samples were suitable for molecular studies including the immunohistochemical detection of intranuclear Hes1 in malignant cells, and the laser-capture microdissection-mediated measurement of Gli-1 mRNA in tumour stromal myofibroblasts.

CONCLUSIONS

Direct formalin fixation of pancreatic EUS-FNA micro-cores demonstrates superiority regarding diagnostic delay, costs, and specimen suitability for molecular studies. We advocate this approach for future investigational trials in pancreatic cancer patients.

How to improve the success of endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration cytology in the diagnosis of pancreatic lesions

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is highly accurate for assessing the pancreatic parenchyma and ductal system. Currently, it is the most sensitive imaging procedure for detecting small solid pancreatic masses. EUS-guided fine needle aspiration cytology (EUS-FNA) is a safe and highly accurate tool for the diagnosis of pancreatic malignancy. Prior to perform an EUS-FNA one should wonder whether the benefits outweigh the potential risks of the procedure. Therefore, it is important to take into account whether the procedure will influence patient management. The diagnostic yield and success rate of EUS-FNA in pancreatic lesions varies greatly depending on many factors including: the characteristics of the lesion itself (location of the mass and consistency of the lesion), technical factors (type of needle size, use of stylet, use of suction and number of needle passes performed) and the availability of immediate cytological assessment of the specimen. The aim of this review is to analyze all these factors for optimizing specimen collection and diagnostic efficiency in dealing with solid pancreatic masses.

Differentiation of multiple types of pancreatico-biliary tumors by molecular analysis of clinical specimens

Timely and accurate diagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is critical in order to provide adequate treatment to patients. However, the clinical signs and symptoms of PDAC are shared by several types of malignant or benign tumors which may be difficult to differentiate from PDAC with conventional diagnostic procedures. Among others, these include ampullary cancers, solid pseudopapillary tumors, and adenocarcinomas of the distant bile duct, as well as inflammatory masses developing in chronic pancreatitis. Here, we report an approach to accurately differentiate between these different types of pancreatic masses based on molecular analysis of biopsy material. A total of 156 bulk tissue and fine needle aspiration biopsy samples were analyzed using a dedicated diagnostic cDNA array and a composite classification algorithm developed based on linear support vector machines. All five histological subtypes of pancreatic masses were clearly separable with 100% accuracy when using all 156 individual samples for classification. Generalized performance of the classification system was tested by 10 × 10-fold cross validation (100 test runs). Correct classification into the five diagnostic groups was demonstrated for 81.5% of 1,560 test set predictions. Performance increased to 85.3% accuracy when PDAC and distant bile duct carcinomas were combined in a single diagnostic class. Importantly, overall sensitivity of detection of malignant disease was 92.2%. The molecular diagnostic approach presented here is suitable to significantly aid in the differential diagnosis of undetermined pancreatic masses. To our knowledge, this is the first study reporting accurate differentiation between several types of pancreatico-biliary tumors in a single molecular analytical procedure.

Relationship of pancreatic mass size and diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is central to discerning the diagnosis of solid pancreatic tumors through tissue acquisition. Test performance is affected by a number of factors including location of mass within the pancreas, presence of onsite cytology technologist, and number of passes with the needle. The influence of tumor size has not been well studied.

AIM

The objective of the current study was to determine whether the size of mass affects the diagnostic accuracy for solid pancreatic lesions aspirated under EUS guidance.

METHODS

Data were collected retrospectively on all patients with solid pancreatic masses undergoing EUS-FNA from June 2003 to August 2010. The cytology samples were reported as positive, suspicious for malignancy, atypical, negative, or nondiagnostic. The gold standard for a cytological diagnosis was histological confirmation or clinical follow-up of more than 6 months with repeat imaging. Patients were divided into five groups based upon lesion size as follows: (a) less than 1 cm, (b) 1-2 cm, (c) 2-3 cm, (d) 3-4 cm, and (e) greater than 4 cm. Performance characteristics of EUS-FNA including sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were compared for each group. Accuracy was defined as the ratio of the sum of true-positive and true-negative values divided by the number of lesions.

RESULTS

We identified 583 patients with solid pancreatic lesions in which EUS-FNA was performed and adequate cellularity was obtained (47% men, mean age 65 ± 1.4 (SE) years). Overall, 486 (83%) of lesions were pancreatic adenocarcinoma, 18 (3%) were neuroendocrine tumors, 12 (2%) were lymphomas, and 67 (12%) were benign lesions. The median size of the mass was 3 cm (range, 0.5-7 cm). A mean of 4.9 passes (range, 1-9 passes) was needed to obtain adequate samples from lesions. The overall yield of obtaining adequate samples for diagnosis was 85%. When stratified by size, the EUS-FNA sensitivity for lesions with size <1, 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, and >4 cm was 40, 75.9, 86.9, 93.2, and 91.6%, respectively; EUS-FNA sensitivity strongly correlate with tumor size (p < 0.001). Similarly, the accuracy of EUS-FNA increased as lesion size increased, ranging from 47% for tumors less than 1 cm to 88% for tumors greater than 4 cm (p < 0.05). Location of tumor and number of needle passes did not significantly influence EUS-FNA performance characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

The sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA for solid pancreatic lesions is strongly correlated with tumor size. Sensitivity and accuracy decrease significantly for tumors that are smaller than 1 cm.

Endosonography in solid and cystic pancreatic tumors

Pancreatic tumors being either benign or malignant can be solid or cystic. Although diverse in presentation, their imaging features share commonalities and it is often difficult to distinguish these tumors. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is the most sensitive of the imaging procedures currently available for characterizing pancreatic tumors, and is especially good in identifying the smaller sized tumors. Additional applications inclusive of EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) are useful in tissue sampling and preoperative staging of pancreatic tumors.Although diagnostic capabilities have greatly evolved with advances in EUS and tissue processing technology (cytology, tumor markers, DNA analysis), differentiation of benign and malignant neoplasms, neoplastic and non-neoplastic (chronic pancreatitis) conditions, continues to be challenging.Recent innovative applications include contrast-enhanced EUS with Doppler mode, contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS, 3-dimensinal EUS, and EUS elastography. Incorporation of these methods has improved the differential diagnosis of pancreatic tumors. Finally, a multi-disciplinary approach involving radiology, gastroenterology and surgical specialties is often necessary for accurate diagnosis and management of solid and cystic pancreatic tumors.

False-positive EUS-guided FNA cytology for solid pancreatic lesions

BACKGROUND

The currently accepted paradigm is that the false-positive (FP) rate for EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) cytologic analysis of a pancreatic lesion is less than 1%.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the FP rate of EUS-FNA in patients who underwent surgical resection for presumed pancreatic cancer.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

SETTING

Tertiary-care referral center.

PATIENTS

This study involved 367 patients with solid pancreatic lesions in whom EUS-FNA cytology results were interpreted as positive or suspicious for malignancy, which resulted in subsequent surgical resection.

INTERVENTION

Surgical resection.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

The FP diagnosis was defined as EUS-FNA cytology specimens being reported as "positive" or "suspicious for malignancy" but that were later proven to be benign on surgical pathology.

RESULTS

The FP rate for EUS-FNA was 4 of 367 (1.1%) when only "positive" cytology findings were interpreted as malignant and 14 of 367 (3.8%) when both suspicious and positive cytology findings were interpreted as malignant. Among the 4 cases falsely interpreted as positive, 1 was falsely diagnosed cytologically as a neuroendocrine tumor and 3 as adenocarcinomas. All FP specimens showed chronic pancreatitis on surgical pathology. The incidence of discordance between cytology and surgical pathology did not change over time (2000-2006: 8/188 [4.3%] vs 2007-2010: 6/179 [3.4%]; P = .79).

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective study at a single center.

CONCLUSION

In a retrospective cohort trial, the FP rate for EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic lesions was 1.1%. Findings of the current study are in line with previous studies that have evaluated the FP cytology rates with EUS-FNA of solid lesions. FP cases transpired primarily as a result of cytologic misinterpretation in the setting of chronic pancreatitis.