Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and Trucut biopsy in thoracic lesions: when tissue is the issue

Outcome of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Sampling of Mediastinal Lymphadenopathy

Methods

From May 2006 to January 2017, patients with mediastinal lymphadenopathy, who received an EUS-guided trucut biopsy or an FNA biopsy, were retrospectively reviewed. Demographic data, endosonographic characteristics of LNs including size, shape, border, echotexture, and echogenicity, diagnostic yield, and adverse events between the trucut needle group and aspiration needle group were compared.

Results

A total of 69 patients (trucut group, n = 33 vs. aspiration group, n = 36) were identified. There were no significant differences in demographic data, indication for an EUS-guided biopsy, location of LNs, number of needle passes, and endosonographic features of LNs between the two groups. The sizes of LNs were larger in the trucut group than in the aspiration group (28.9 ± 14.0 mm vs. 21.1 ± 8.8 mm, P = 0.007). However, there was no significant difference in the ratio of LNs that were ≥10 mm in both groups. The overall accuracy of the EUS-guided biopsy for the diagnosis of malignant lesions was 79.7% (55/69). There were no significant differences in the histological diagnostic yield of malignant LNs between the two groups. There were no significant procedure-related adverse events in both groups.

Conclusion

The EUS-guided biopsy can be a useful method for histologic evaluation of mediastinal nodal lesions.

Challenges in Pathology Specimen Processing in the New Era of Precision Medicine

CONTEXT.—

Precision therapies for patients with driver mutations can offer deep and durable responses that correlate with diagnosis, metastasis prognosis, and improvement in survival. Such targeted therapies will continue to increase, pushing us to change our traditional approaches. We needed to search for new tools to effectively integrate technological advancements into our practices because of their capability to improve the efficiency and accuracy of our diagnostic and treatment approaches. Perhaps nothing is as relevant as identifying and implementing new workflows for processing pathologic specimens and for improving communication of critical laboratory information to and from clinicians for appropriate care of patients in an efficient and timely manner.

OBJECTIVES.—

To define the gold standard in delivering the best care for patients, to identify gaps in the process, and to identify potential solutions that would improve our process, including gaps related to knowledge, skills, attitudes, and practices.

DESIGN.—

We assembled a team across disciplines to systematically perform a gap analysis study to clarify the discrepancy between the current reality in pathology specimen processing and the desired optimal situation to deliver the results intended for patient care.

RESULTS.—

A practical collaborative workflow for specimen management seeking the cooperation of the stakeholders in each medical discipline to provide guidelines in specimen collection, delivery, processing, and reporting of results with the ultimate goal of improving patients' outcomes is provided.

CONCLUSIONS.—

New tools are required to effectively integrate data-driven approaches in specimen processing to meet the new demands.

Endoscopic Ultrasound Fine-Needle Aspiration versus Fine-Needle Biopsy for Lymph Node Diagnosis: A Large Multicenter Comparative Analysis

Background/Aims

Endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is preferred for sampling of lymph nodes (LNs) adjacent to the gastrointestinal wall; however, fine-needle biopsy (FNB) may provide improved diagnostic outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of FNA versus FNB for LN sampling.

Methods

This was a multicenter retrospective study of prospectively collected data to evaluate outcomes of EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB for LN sampling. Characteristics analyzed included sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, the number of needle passes, diagnostic adequacy of rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE), cell-block analysis, and adverse events.

Results

A total of 209 patients underwent EUS-guided LN sampling. The mean lesion size was 16.22±8.03 mm, with similar sensitivity and accuracy between FNA and FNB ([67.21% vs. 75.00%, respectively, p=0.216] and [78.80% vs. 83.17%, respectively, p=0.423]). The specificity of FNB was better than that of FNA (100.00% vs. 93.62%, p=0.01). The number of passes required for diagnosis was not different. Abdominal and peri-hepatic LN location demonstrated FNB to have a higher sensitivity (81.08% vs. 64.71%, p=0.031 and 80.95% vs. 58.33%, p=0.023) and accuracy (88.14% vs. 75.29%, p=0.053 and 88.89% vs. 70.49%, p=0.038), respectively. ROSE was a significant predictor for accuracy (odds ratio, 5.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.15–23.08; p=0.032). No adverse events were reported in either cohort.

Conclusions

Both EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB are safe for the diagnosis of LNs. EUS-FNB is preferred for abdominal LN sampling. EUS-FNA+ ROSE was similar to EUS-FNB alone, showing better diagnosis for EUS-FNB than traditional FNA. While ROSE remained a significant predictor for accuracy, due to its poor availability in most centers, its use may be limited to cases with previous inconclusive diagnoses.

Largest known malignant solitary fibrous tumour of the pleura-extended resection warranting cardiopulmonary bypass support

This case reports the largest known malignant solitary fibrous tumour of the pleura treated with en bloc surgical resection warranting the use of cardiopulmonary bypass support. A 60-year-old male presented with dyspnoea and a dry cough. Following extensive investigations, a radiological and histologic diagnosis of malignant solitary fibrous tumour of the pleura was made. This 4.3 kg tumour occupied the entire left hemithorax, involved the left lung and infiltrated into the pericardial cavity. Although the postoperative course was uneventful with a 12-day length of stay, the patient opted not to undergo adjuvant radiotherapy to a single positive margin site and died 6 months later due to local recurrence.

Is there a difference between 19G core biopsy needle and 22G core biopsy needle in diagnosing the correct etiology? - A meta-analysis and systematic review

AIM

To compare the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) 19G core biopsies and 22G core biopsies in diagnosing the correct etiology for a solid mass.

METHODS

Articles were searched in Medline, PubMed, and Ovid journals. Pooling was conducted by both fixed and random effects models.

RESULTS

Initial search identified 4460 reference articles for 19G and 22G, of these 670 relevant articles were selected and reviewed. Data was extracted from 6 studies for 19G (n = 289) and 16 studies for 22G (n = 592) which met the inclusion criteria. EUS 19G core biopsies had a pooled sensitivity of 91.6% (95%CI: 87.1-95.0) and pooled specificity of 95.9% (95%CI: 88.6-99.2), whereas EUS 22G had a pooled sensitivity of 83.3% (95%CI: 79.7-86.6) and pooled specificity of 64.3% (95%CI: 54.7-73.1). The positive likelihood ratio of EUS 19G core biopsies was 9.08 (95%CI: 1.12-73.66) and EUS 22G core biopsies was 1.99 (95%CI: 1.09-3.66). The negative likelihood ratio of EUS 19G core biopsies was 0.12 (95%CI: 0.07-0.24) and EUS 22G core biopsies was 0.25 (95%CI: 0.14-0.41). The diagnostic odds ratio was 84.74 (95%CI: 18.31-392.26) for 19G core biopsies and 10.55 (95% CI: 3.29-33.87) for 22G needles.

CONCLUSION

EUS 19G core biopsies have an excellent diagnostic value and seem to be better than EUS 22G biopsies in detecting the correct etiology for a solid mass.

Impact of EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling with a new core needle on the need for onsite cytopathologic assessment: a preliminary study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

FNA is the primary method of EUS tissue acquisition. In an attempt to improve our yield of EUS-guided tissue acquisition, we compared fine-needle biopsy (FNB) sampling without rapid onsite evaluation (ROSE) with FNA with ROSE and assessed the concordance of FNA and FNB sampling.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from consecutive patients. Patients underwent FNB sampling and FNA of the same single lesion, with the same needle gauge and number of passes. FNA with ROSE was performed with a standard FNA needle. FNB sampling was performed with a new dedicated core needle. FNA samples were assessed with ROSE, and a final interpretation was provided by cytopathology staff; FNB samples were analyzed by surgical pathologists, each not made aware of the other's opinion.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients underwent 312 passes in 42 different lesions. A diagnosis of malignancy was more likely with FNB sampling than with FNA (72.7% vs 66.7%, P = .727), although statistical significance was not reached. FNA and FNB sampling had similar sensitivities, specificities, and accuracies for cancer (81.5% vs 88.9%, 100% vs 100%, and 84.8% vs 90.9%, respectively). FNB sampling provided qualitative information not reported on FNA, such as degree of differentiation in malignancy, metastatic origin, and rate of proliferation in neuroendocrine tumors.

CONCLUSIONS

FNB sampling without ROSE using a dedicated core needle performed as well as FNA with ROSE in this small cohort, suggesting that FNB sampling with this new core needle may eliminate the need for an onsite cytopathologic assessment, without loss of diagnostic accuracy.

Pathologic evaluation of a new endoscopic ultrasound needle designed to obtain core tissue samples: A pilot study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Standard endoscopic ultrasound-fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) needles are in widespread use. Meaningful differences between the available needles have been difficult to identify. Recently, a new EUS needle (Shark Core®, Covidien, Dublin, Leinster, Ireland), has been introduced in an attempt to improve diagnostic accuracy, tissue yield, and to potentially obtain a core tissue sample. We performed a pilot study prospectively to evaluate this new needle when compared to a standard EUS-FNA needle.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Analysis of the first 15 patients undergoing EUS-FNA with the Shark Core needle was performed and it was compared to EUS-FNA in 15 patients who underwent EUS-FNA with a standard needle.

RESULTS

The Shark Core needle required fewer needle passes to obtain diagnostic adequacy than the standard needle [(χ(2)(1) = 11.3, P < 0.001]. The Shark Core needle required 1.5 passes to reach adequacy, whereas the standard needle required three passes. For cases with cell blocks, the Shark Core needle produced diagnostic material in 85% of cases [95% confidence interval (CI): 54-98], whereas the standard needle produced diagnostic material in 38% of the cases (95% CI: 9-76). The Shark Core needle produced actual tissue cores 82% of the time (95% CI: 48-98) and the standard needle produced no tissue cores (95% CI: 0-71) (P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

This pilot study found that the Shark Core needle had a high rate of producing adequate cytologic material for the diagnosis of pancreatic and peri-pancreatic lesions sampled by EUS with fewer passes required to obtain a definitive diagnosis and with a high rate of tissue cores being obtained when compared to a standard FNA needle.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration with on-site cytopathology versus core biopsy: a comparison of both techniques performed at the same endoscopic session

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) with bedside cytopathology is the gold standard for assessment of pancreatic, subepithelial, and other lesions in close proximity to the gastrointestinal tract, but it is time-consuming, has certain diagnostic limitations, and bedside cytopathology is not widely available.

AIMS

The goal of this study is to compare the diagnostic yield of EUS-guided FNA with on-site cytopathology and EUS-guided core biopsy.

METHODS

Twenty-six patients with gastrointestinal mass lesions requiring biopsy at a tertiary medical center were included in this retrospective analysis of a prospective cohort. Two core biopsies were taken using a 22 gauge needle followed by FNA guided by a bedside cytopathologist at the same endoscopic session. The diagnostic yield and test characteristics of EUS core biopsy and EUS FNA with bedside cytopathology were examined.

RESULTS

The mean number of passes was 3.2 for FNA, and the mean procedure time was 39.4 minutes. The final diagnosis was malignant in 92.3 %. Sensitivity and specificity were 83 % and 100 %, respectively, for FNA, and 91.7 % and 100 %, respectively, for core biopsy. Diagnostic accuracy was 92.3 % for FNA and 84.6 % for core biopsy. The two approaches were in agreement in 88.4 % with a kappa statistic of 0.66 (95 % confidence interval 0.33 - 0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

An approach using two passes with a core biopsy needle is comparable to the current gold standard of FNA with bedside cytopathology. The performance of two core biopsies is time-efficient and could represent a good alternative to FNA with bedside cytopathology.

Minimally invasive mediastinal staging of non-small-cell lung cancer: emphasis on ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration

BACKGROUND

Mediastinal staging in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is crucial in dictating surgical vs nonsurgical treatment. Cervical mediastinoscopy is the "gold standard" in mediastinal staging but is invasive and limited in assessing the posterior subcarinal, lower mediastinal, and hilar lymph nodes. Less invasive approaches to NSCLC staging have become more widely available.

METHODS

This article reviews several of these techniques, including noninvasive mediastinal staging of NSCLC, endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) and fine-needle aspiration (FNA), endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and FNA, and the combination of EBUS/EUS.

RESULTS

Noninvasive mediastinal staging with computed tomography and positron-emission tomography scans has significant false-negative and false-positive rates and requires lymph node tissue confirmation. FNA techniques, with guidance by EBUS and EUS, have become more widely available. The combination of EBUS-FNA and EUS-FNA of mediastinal lymph nodes can be a viable alternative to surgical mediastinal staging. Current barriers to the dissemination of these techniques include initial cost of equipment, lack of access to rapid on-site cytology, and the time required to obtain sufficient skills to duplicate published results.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the last decade, these approaches to NSCLC staging have become more widely available. Continued study into these noninvasive techniques is warranted.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration: How to obtain a core biopsy?

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration has emerged as the procedure of choice to obtain samples to reach a definitive diagnosis of lesions of the gastrointestinal tract and of adjacent organs. The obtainment of a tissue core biopsy presents several advantages that can substantially contribute to the widespread diffusion of EUS utilization in the community and in countries where cytology expertise may be difficult to be achieved. This article will review the EUS-guided fine needle biopsy techniques developed so far, the clinical results, their limitations as well as their future perspective.

Addition of Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration and On-Site Cytology to EUS-Guided Fine Needle Biopsy Increases Procedure Time but Not Diagnostic Accuracy

Background/Aims

Although the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound with fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in pancreas adenocarcinoma is high, endoscopic ultrasound with fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) is often required in other lesions; in these cases, it may be possible to forgo initial EUS-FNA and rapid on-site cytology evaluation (ROSE). The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB alone (EUS-FNB group) with a conventional sampling algorithm of EUS-FNA with ROSE followed by EUS-FNB (EUS-FNA/B group) in nonpancreas adenocarcinoma lesions.

Methods

Retrospective cohort study of subjects who underwent EUS sampling of nonpancreatic adenocarcinoma lesions between February 2011 and May 2013.

Results

Over the study period, there were 43 lesions biopsied in 41 unique patients in the EUS-FNB group and 53 patients in the EUS-FNA/B group. Overall diagnostic accuracy was similar between the EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA/B groups (83.7% vs. 84.9%; p=1.0). In the subgroup of subepithelial mass lesions, diagnostic accuracy remained similar in the EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA/B groups (81.0% and 70.6%; p=0.7). EUS-FNB procedures were significantly shorter than those in the EUS-FNA/B group (58.4 minutes vs. 73.5 minutes; p<0.0001).

Conclusions

EUS-FNB without on-site cytology provides a high diagnostic accuracy in nonpancreas adenocarcinoma lesions. There appears to be no additive benefit with initial EUS-FNA but this requires further study in a prospective study.

Complication rate of endosonography (endobronchial and endoscopic ultrasound): a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Endosonography [endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration and endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS)-guided transbronchial needle aspiration] is increasingly used for lung cancer staging and the assessment of sarcoidosis. Serious adverse events (SAE) have been reported in case reports, but the true incidence of complications is yet unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the rate of SAE related to endosonography and to investigate associated risk factors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane libraries were searched for eligible references up to April 2012 and these included studies reporting on linear EUS or EBUS for the analysis of mediastinal/hilar nodal or central intrapulmonary lesions. Case series describing complications were excluded. Reported complications were classified into SAE or minor adverse events (AE).

RESULTS

190 studies met the inclusion criteria. Information on follow-up was missing in half of the studies. In 16,181 patients, 23 SAE (0.14%) and 35 AE (0.22%) were reported. No mortality was observed. SAE were more frequent in patients investigated with EUS (0.30%) than in those investigated with EBUS (0.05%). Infectious SAE were most prevalent (0.07%) and predominantly occurred in patients with cystic lesions and sarcoidosis. In lung cancer patients, complications were rare.

DISCUSSION

Endosonography for intrathoracic nodal assessment seems safe for lung cancer patients and mortality has not been reported. For cystic lesions and sarcoidosis, there may be a small, but nonnegligible risk of infectious complications. The true incidence of SAE might be higher as accurate documentation of complications is missing in most studies.

Beyond cytology: why and when does the oncologist require core tissue?

There are 2 main reasons why oncologists may require additional tissue and a histologic section in addition to cytopathology from FNA specimens: improved diagnostic accuracy and molecular characterization of tumors. Rather than mutually exclusive diagnostic procedures, EUS-FNA and EUS-CNB must be viewed as supplementary techniques and both approaches should be incorporated as essential tools in the current endoscopic armamentarium.

Techniques for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy

Although endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is the method of choice to obtain samples to reach definitive diagnosis of lesions of the gastrointestinal tract and of adjacent organs, it cannot fully characterize certain neoplasms. The lack of cytology expertise has hindered the dissemination of EUS, limiting its widespread use. The obtainment of a tissue specimen through EUS fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) may overcome the limitations of EUS-FNA. EUS-FNB is expected to move the practice of EUS from cytology to histology, expanding the use of EUS and facilitating targeted therapies and monitoring of treatment response in a more biologically driven manner.

Tips to overcome technical challenges in EUS-guided tissue acquisition

The diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA depends on several factors, such as the experience of the endosonographer, the characteristics of the lesion, the clinical status of the patient, the size and type of needles, the methods of specimen preparation, as well as cytopathologist expertise. The endosonographic technique can be improved when several tips and tricks useful to overcome challenges of FNA are known. Technical challenges of FNA are related to the characteristics of the lesion and its surroundings, sonographic imaging, and limitations related to the needle. Several tips and tricks necessary to overcome them are presented in this review.

Rescue Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-Guided Trucut Biopsy Following Suboptimal EUS-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration for Mediastinal Lesions

Background/Aims

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and Trucut biopsy (TCB) are sensitive techniques for diagnosing mediastinal lesions, but it is unclear how either one or both should be used to obtain a pathologic diagnosis. The objective of our study was to evaluate whether EUS-TCB impacts the diagnosis of mediastinal lesions after the initial on-site review of EUS-FNA specimen suggests a suboptimal result.

Methods

We enrolled consecutive patients with mediastinal lesions who underwent EUS-TCB during the same procedure if the initial EUS-FNA demonstrated an inadequate FNA sample or suggested that histopathology was required for diagnosis. Diagnostic accuracies between procedures were compared as the main outcome.

Results

Twenty-seven patients (14 men; median age, 56 years; range, 19 to 82 years) underwent EUS-FNA and EUS-TCB to evaluate a mediastinal lymphadenopathy or mass (n=17), to determine the cancer stage (n=3) or to exclude tumor recurrence or metastasis (n=7). The overall diagnostic accuracies of EUS-FNA and EUS-TCB were 78% and 67%, respectively (p=0.375). The combined diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA plus EUS-TCB was 82%. In six patients with nondiagnostic EUS-FNA, EUS-TCB provided a final diagnosis in one patient (17%).

Conclusions

In the current series of patients with mediastinal masses or adenopathy, the administration of EUS-TCB following suboptimal results for the on-site cytology review did not increase the diagnostic yield.

Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration: Technique and applications in clinical practice

Since its initial report in 1992, endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has now been incorporated into the diagnostic and staging algorithm for the evaluation of benign and malignant diseases of the gastrointestinal tract and of adjacent organs. Its introduction constitutes a major breakthrough in the endoscopic field and has gradually transformed EUS from a pure imaging modality into a more interventional. In addition, the possibility of collecting samples, providing a definitive cytological and/or histological evidence of the presence of malignancy, has strongly contributed to changing EUS from a subjective, highly operator dependant procedure into a more objective one. This article will review the instrumentation, technique and the most important clinical applications of EUS-FNA.

EUS-guided fine-needle tissue acquisition by using a 19-gauge needle in a selected patient population: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

The ability to obtain tissue samples for histological examination during EUS has theoretical advantages over cytology alone.

OBJECTIVE

To prospectively evaluate the feasibility and yield of EUS-guided fine-needle tissue acquisition (EUS-FNTA) with a large-gauge needle in patients in whom we expected histology to be more useful than cytology to reach a definitive diagnosis.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Tertiary care academic medical center.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients with subepithelial lesions, esophagogastric wall thickening, mediastinal and abdominal masses/lymphadenopathy of unknown origin, or pancreatic lesions after nondiagnostic FNA.

INTERVENTIONS

EUS-FNTA with a 19-gauge needle.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Feasibility and yield of EUS-FNTA.

RESULTS

A total of 120 patients with a mean age of 61 ± 14.6 years and mean lesion size of 38 ± 25 mm (range 8-140 mm) were enrolled. FNTA was successfully performed in all but 1 patient (98.9%), and adequate samples for histological examination were obtained in 116 of the 119 patients (97.5%) in whom EUS-FNTA was technically successful. A mean of 2.8 ± 0.8 passes per patient were performed. At the time of current follow-up, a definitive diagnosis was available in 117 of the 120 patients (97.5%), with only 8 false-negative results. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNTA in the 117 patients with a definitive diagnosis were 91.8%, 100%, 100%, 71.4%, and 93.2%, respectively.

LIMITATIONS

Single-center study with limited power.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-FNTA by using a large-gauge needle has a high yield and promising diagnostic accuracy and could be used when histology may be more useful than cytology to reach a definitive diagnosis.

Feasibility and yield of a new EUS histology needle: results from a multicenter, pooled, cohort study

BACKGROUND

EUS-guided FNA is an efficacious technique for sampling intraintestinal and extraintestinal mass lesions. However, cytology has limitations to its final yield and accuracy, which may be overcome if histological specimens are provided to the pathologist.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate feasibility, yield, and diagnostic accuracy of a newly developed 19-gauge, fine-needle biopsy (FNB) device.

DESIGN

Multicenter, pooled, cohort study.

SETTING

Five medical centers.

PATIENTS

This study involved 109 consecutive patients with 114 intraintestinal or extraintestinal mass lesions and/or peri-intestinal lymph nodes.

INTERVENTION

EUS-guided FNB (EUS-FNB) with a newly developed, 19-gauge, FNB device.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Percentage of cases in which pathologists classified the sample quality as optimal for histological evaluation and the overall diagnostic accuracy compared with a composite criterion-standard diagnosis.

RESULTS

We evaluated 114 lesions (mean [± standard deviation] size 35.1 ± 18.7 mm; 84 malignant [73.7%] and 30 [26.3%] benign). EUS-FNB was technically feasible in 112 lesions (98.24%). Sample quality was adequate for full histological assessment in 102 lesions (89.47%). In 98 cases (85.96%), diagnosis proved to be correct according to criterion-standard diagnosis. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and overall accuracy for diagnosis of malignancy were 90.2%, 100%, 100%, 78.9%, and 92.9%, respectively.

LIMITATIONS

Use of a surrogate criterion-standard diagnosis, including clinical follow-up when no surgical specimens were available, mainly in benign diagnoses.

CONCLUSION

Performing an EUS-FNB with a new 19-gauge histology needle is feasible for histopathology diagnosis of intraintestinal and extraintestinal mass lesions, offering the possibility of obtaining a core sample for histological evaluation in the majority of cases, with an overall diagnostic accuracy of over 85%.

Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration in the diagnosis of lymphoma

In recent years, endoscopic ultrasound techniques with Fine Needle Aspiration (FNA) have become an increasingly used diagnostic aid in the differentiation of mediastinal lymphadenopathy. Endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) and endoesophageal ultrasound (EUS) are now available for clinicians to reach mediastinal and paramediastinal masses using a minimally invasive approach. These techniques are an established component for diagnosing and staging lung cancer and their benefit in the diagnosis of lymphoma's has been highlighted in a number of case studies. However, the lack of tissue architecture obtained by cytological FNA specimens decreases the diagnostic accuracy for benign causes of thoracic lymphadenopathies, lymphomas, and histopathological subtyping of lung cancer. Accordingly, our study group have adapted the FNA sampling technique, resulting in tissue fragments that can be used for histopathological examinations. As an illustration, we report a case of follicular non-Hodgkin lymphoma, diagnosed on tissue fragments obtained by adjusted EUS FNA. We believe that this relatively simple adjustment to routine FNA sampling can help to overcome the diagnostic limitations inherent in cytology obtained by routine FNA.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy and trucut biopsy in gastroenterology - An overview

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biopsies are reliable, safe and effective techniques in obtaining samples for cytological or histological examinations either as a primary procedure or in cases where other biopsy techniques have failed. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNA), as well as endoscopic ultrasound-guided trucut biopsy (EUS-TCB), has proven to be of significant value in the diagnostic evaluation of benign and malignant diseases, as well as in staging of the malignant tumours of the gastrointestinal tract and of adjacent organs. The diagnostic yield of EUS-guided biopsies depends on site, size and characteristics of target tissues as well as technical and procedural factors (type of needle, biopsy technique and material processing). Other weighting factors include expertise, training and interaction between the endosonographer and cytopathologist. Rapid on-site cytological evaluation has proven to be successful in optimising the diagnostic efficiency of EUS-FNA. A sensible alternative is to collect specimens for histological and immunohistochemical investigations in addition to the cytological smears. EUS-FNA using a 22-gauge needle is successful in harvesting core biopsies in approximately three out of four cases. Therefore, the use of 19-gauge needles for EUS-FNA or EUS-TCB may only be necessary in selected cases. The reproducibility of cytopathological diagnosis among pathologists with special experience in assessing material obtained by EUS-guided biopsies is very high. False-positive diagnosis of malignancy in EUS-guided biopsy is rare. False-negative diagnosis appears with variable frequency depending on the target tissue, technical factors and expertise of the endosonographer and cytopathologist. There are numerous challenges and pitfalls in the differential diagnostic classification of benign and malignant lesions. These problems are related to the characteristics of samples obtained by EUS-guided biopsy, as well as to the multiple diagnoses with similar or overlapping cytological or histological characteristics. The high prognostic and therapeutic relevance of the cytopathological diagnoses resulting from EUS-guided biopsy calls for a shared responsibility of an endosonographer and a cytopathologist.

Endosonography in bronchopulmonary disease

The diagnostic approach to diseases of the mediastinum is divided into two phases: (1) imaging techniques and (2) procedures for obtaining tissue samples for cytologic and histologic examination. The latter has for many years represented a considerable challenge to the clinician. Often invasive procedures in general anaesthesia as mediastinoscopy or thoracoscopy have been necessary. However, the sampling of tissue from the mediastinum has been revolutionized by EBUS and EUS, since they give access to the middle and the posterior compartment via the trachea and the oesophagus, respectively. Both EUS FNA and EBUS-TBNA of mediastinal nodes and tumors can provide a specimen adequate for interpretation in over 95% of cases with a specificity of close to 100% and a sensitivity ranging between 88% and 96%. A growing number of studies including randomized trails and meta-analyses have demonstrated a major impact of EUSFNA as well as EBUS-TBNA on management of patients with lung cancer as well as in patients with unknown lesions in the mediastinum. The aim of the present review is to discuss the current role of endosonography in bronchopulmonary diseases focusing on endosonographically guided biopsy via the esophagus, trachea and main bronchi. The concept of complete echo-endoscopic staging of lung cancer is postulated as virtually all mediastinal nodes as well as regions relevant to pulmonal medicine (liver and adrenal glands) can be reached by these two methods in combination.

Comparison of EUS-guided FNA and Trucut biopsy for diagnosing and staging abdominal and mediastinal neoplasms

The objective of this study was to evaluate endoscopic ultrasound Trucut biopsy (TCB) specimens and compare these findings to fine needle aspiration (FNA) specimens for the diagnosis of neoplasia. FNA and TCB specimens were reviewed in blinded fashion by a cytopathologist from patients (N = 93) who had EUS-guided FNA and TCB specimens collected between July 2000 and January 2005. Specimens were categorized as nondiagnostic, negative, suspicious for stromal neoplasm, suspicious for malignancy, positive for stromal neoplasm, or positive for malignancy. Standard final diagnosis based on clinical and/or pathologic follow-up was available for 86 of 93 patients. The final diagnoses comprised malignancy (n = 55), stromal neoplasm (n = 19), and benign findings (n = 12). The combination of FNA and TCB results combined were significantly (P < 0.001) more sensitive that FNA alone for the detection of both malignancy (78% vs. 55%) and stromal neoplasia (79% vs. 19%) without a significant change in overall specificity (92% vs. 100%, P = 1.00). A positive FNA specimen with a negative/nondiagnostic TCB result was established in seven patients with malignancy. A positive TCB diagnosis with a negative/nondiagnostic FNA result was noted in five patients with malignancy. A suspicious FNA result was upgraded to positive in conjunction with TCB specimen evaluation in eight patients with malignancy. The results of this study suggest that TCB is a useful adjunctive technique when used in tandem with FNA for malignancy and stromal neoplasia detection. Additional data are needed to firmly establish practice guidelines for the use of EUS-guided TCB specimens in clinical practice.

The additional value of EUS-guided Tru-cut biopsy to EUS-guided FNA in patients with mediastinal lesions

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

EUS-guided FNA is a sensitive method to obtain cytologic specimens from solid lesions in close proximity to the GI tract. Although FNA provides cells for analysis, large-caliber Tru-cut biopsy (EUS-TCB) needles obtain samples that can be used for additional histopathologic analysis. We assessed the additional diagnostic yield of EUS-TCB in patients with solid mediastinal lesions in whom EUS-FNA was performed.

PATIENTS AND DESIGN

In the period from July 2003 to July 2007, all patients with mediastinal lesions accessible to EUS-FNA and EUS-TCB were evaluated. In all patients, a mean of 3 passes of EUS-FNA was followed by EUS-TCB. Cytologic and histologic specimens were evaluated by 2 pathologists blinded for patient condition. A final diagnosis was obtained by combining all information present (EUS-FNA and EUS-TCB results, mediastinoscopy, bronchoscopy [if performed], and other investigations).

RESULTS

The diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA, EUS-TCB, and the combination of both techniques was 93%, 90%, and 98%, respectively (not significant). In EUS-FNA-negative patients, EUS-TCB provided a final diagnosis in an additional 3 patients (5%). Malignant disease found by EUS-FNA could be specified by EUS-TCB in 15 patients (25% of patients). The granulomatous disease established by cytologic samples of clinically suspected tuberculosis could be specified by EUS-TCB in 2 patients (3%). In 1 patient (2%), both FNA and TCB were inconclusive.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective study.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA and EUS-TCB is comparable. We recommend limiting the use of EUS-TCB to specific cases in which EUS-FNA is not conclusive.

EUS-guided Trucut needle biopsies as first-line diagnostic method for patients with intestinal or extraintestinal mass lesions

INTRODUCTION

Fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is a well-established technique to obtain cytological specimens, but it does not permit the extraction of histological tissue-core samples, which, if available, may increase the yield and accuracy of the histopathological diagnosis. This prospective study was designed to assess the yield and diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided Trucut needle biopsy (TNB) as first-line diagnostic method for suspected malignant lesions identified by upper gastrointestinal EUS.

METHODS

In a prospective case series, 24 consecutive patients (14 women; median age, 68 (range, 38-84) years) with suspected malignancy underwent EUS-TNB with a 19-gauge needle. EUS was performed with a linear scanning echo endoscope. When the EUS-TNB device did not collect adequate samples, subsequent EUS-FNA was performed. The presence or absence of malignancy was confirmed by postoperative histopathology or diagnostic imaging follow-up for at least 9 months.

RESULTS

Adequate tissue specimens were obtained in 20 of 24 (83%) patients by TNB. An accurate diagnosis was achieved in 19 of 20 (95%) patients in whom TNB was successful with a sensitivity and specificity of 93% and 100%, respectively. In 11 patients malignant disease was found, whereas 8 patients showed benign lesions on TNB-obtained histopathology. Thirteen patients underwent additional EUS-FNA. The diagnosis by TNB was confirmed in seven of nine (78%) patients with additional FNA. In three of four patients with inadequate TNB, the diagnosis was established by FNA. The overall accuracy of EUS-TNB was 79% (19/24) for all patients and 92% (22/24) with subsequent FNA. The positive and negative predictive values for the diagnosis of a malignant lesion by EUS-TNB were 57.9% and 88.9%, respectively. Neither method had any procedure-related complications.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-guided TNB is a safe and accurate technique to obtain core specimen for histopathologic diagnosis in patients with suspected malignancies on upper gastrointestinal EUS. FNA can serve as rescue technique and should be performed if TNB fails to obtain adequate tissue samples.

Initial experience with EUS-guided Tru-cut biopsy of benign liver disease

BACKGROUND

Histologic biopsy of the liver is often essential for diagnosing hepatic parenchymal disease. Tissue acquisition is traditionally obtained by a surgical, transvascular, or percutaneous route.

OBJECTIVE

To describe our initial experience with EUS-guided Tru-cut biopsy (EUS-TCB) of benign liver disease.

DESIGN

A prospective case series.

SETTING

A tertiary-referral hospital in Indianapolis, Indiana.

PATIENTS

Consecutive subjects undergoing EUS with suspected hepatic parenchymal disease.

INTERVENTIONS

EUS-TCB of the liver.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Liver biopsy specimen yield, diagnosis, and procedural complications. Specimens were routinely stained with hematoxylin and eosin and with special stains for reticulin, iron, and trichome. Each case was reviewed by a single experienced pathologist for the number of portal spaces, total specimen length, and final diagnosis. An adequate specimen was defined as 6 or more complete portal tracts.

RESULTS

Between February 2007 and March 2008, 21 consecutive patients (mean age 45 years; 13 women) were evaluated. The most common indications for liver biopsy were suspected nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (n = 9), intrahepatic cholestasis (n = 4), and suspected cirrhosis (n = 3). Transgastric biopsy (median 3 passes, range 1-4) into the left lobe (n = 18) or both the left and caudate lobe (n = 3) yielded a median total specimen length of 9 mm (range 1-23 mm). The median total number of portal tracts in the specimen was 2 complete (range 0-10) plus 3 partial (range 0-8) tracts. Six or more complete portal tracts were present in 6 of 21 (29%). A histologic diagnosis was obtained in 19 of 21 (90%). There were no complications.

LIMITATIONS

The small sample size and low-risk population.

CONCLUSIONS

In our initial experience, transgastric EUS-TCB of suspected benign liver disease by using a 19-gauge needle appears safe and feasible. Samples obtained are usually smaller than those traditionally considered adequate for histologic assessment. Further refinement of this technique appears indicated.

Efficacy, safety, and predictive factors for a positive yield of EUS-guided Trucut biopsy: a large tertiary referral center experience

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided trucut biopsy (EUS-TCB) technique has the advantage of obtaining tissue for histological examination rather than for cytology alone. However, the diagnostic yield may depend on factors related to both technical aspects and the lesions sampled. Safety of EUS-TCB is yet to be established in a large number of procedures. The aim of the study was to determine factors predicting a positive diagnostic yield, and safety for EUS-TCB in a large tertiary referral center-based service.

METHODS

All patients were referred for EUS-guided tissue sampling as a part of their diagnostic workup. Linear-array echoendoscope (GF-2000-OL5, KeyMed) with a 19-gauge trucut needle (Quick-Core, Wilson-Cook) was used by two operators to obtain tissue samples. Clinical data, details of the EUS-TCB, post-procedure complications, and histology were prospectively collected between May 2002 and February 2008.

RESULTS

In total, 247 patients (143 men) aged 57-73 (median 66) had EUS-TCB performed. Lesions sampled were in the pancreas (113), esophagogastric wall (34), and extra-pancreatic areas (100) (lymph nodes: 52). The maximum diameter of the lesion/wall thickness ranged from 0.6 to 5.4 cm (median 3). One to five passes were made (median 3) to obtain tissue cores 2-18 mm (median 10) in length. The procedure failed in 6% of cases. The overall diagnostic accuracy was 75%. The overall complication rate was 2% (bronchopneumonia, minor hemoptysis, minor hematemesis, mucosal tear, retropharyngeal abscess) with no procedure-related deaths. Site of lesion (pancreatic vs. extra-pancreatic, P<0.032), site of biopsy (stomach vs. duodenum vs. esophagus, P<0.001), and number of passes (< or =2 vs.>2, P<0.013) were predictors of a positive diagnostic yield in univariate analysis. However, only the site of biopsy (P<0.001, 95% CI: 0.58-2.32) and number of passes (P=0.05) were independent predictors in multinominal logistic regression.

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic yield of EUS-TCB is higher when lesion is approached through the stomach and better when more than two passes were made. In this large series, the complication rate of 2% associated with EUS-TCB was similar to that reported with EUS-fine needle aspiration technique.

The value of touch imprint cytology in EUS-guided Trucut biopsy

BACKGROUND

EUS-guided Trucut biopsy (TCB) enables the acquisition of tissue cores for histologic assessment. Touch imprint cytology (TIC) can be performed at the time of a biopsy to assess the adequacy of the sample; however, limited information is available on the diagnostic value of TIC of these specimens.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the diagnostic accuracy of TIC compared with a TCB.

PATIENTS AND DESIGN

Consecutive EUS-guided TCB and TIC (n = 109) were retrospectively and independently reviewed by a surgical pathologist (for the TCB) and a cytopathologist (for TIC) blinded to the final diagnoses.

SETTING

University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Diagnostic accuracy of a TCB, TIC, and combined TCB + TIC.

RESULTS

The diagnostic accuracy of a TCB was 92.7% (95% CI, 83.1%-97.3%), TIC was 82.6% (95% CI, 74.3%-88.6%), and TCB + TIC was 95.4% (95% CI, of 89.4%-98.3%). The diagnostic accuracy of a TCB alone was superior to TIC alone (P = .038); a TCB was diagnostic in 14 cases that were nondiagnostic by TIC. The addition of TIC allowed for the identification of 3 malignancies (2.8%) that were not identified on TCB alone. In 22 cases, TIC was considered diagnostic, but a TCB provided additional specific diagnostic information.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective study and relatively low numbers.

CONCLUSIONS

TIC is a valuable tool for use in a EUS-guided TCB; TIC is independently diagnostically accurate, which allows for confidence in a rapid preliminary diagnosis, and it provides additional diagnostic value when combined with TCB.