High yield of same-session EUS-guided liver biopsy by 19-gauge FNA needle in patients undergoing EUS to exclude biliary obstruction

Review article: Oesophageal disorders in chronic liver disease

BACKGROUND

Oesophageal disorders and chronic liver disease are common worldwide and significantly impact quality of life. The intricate link between these conditions, including how oesophageal disorders like GERD, Barrett's oesophagus and oesophageal cancer affect and are affected by chronic liver disease, remains poorly understood.

AIMS

To review the relationship between oesophageal disorders and chronic liver disease, evaluating epidemiology, pathophysiology and therapeutic factors.

METHODS

We reviewed the literature on the relationship between oesophageal disorders and chronic liver disease, including cirrhosis, using the PubMed database RESULTS: Oesophageal disorders such as gastroesophageal reflux disease, Barrett's oesophagus, oesophageal cancer, oesophageal motor disorders and oesophageal candidiasis are prevalent among individuals with cirrhosis, exacerbating the burden of liver disease. These diseases have a multifaceted symptomatology and pathogenic basis, posing a significant challenge in cirrhotic patients that necessitates careful diagnosis and management. Additionally, therapies frequently used for these diseases, such as proton pump inhibitors, require careful consideration in cirrhotic patients due to potential adverse effects and altered pharmacokinetics. Managing oesophageal disorders in cirrhotic patients requires a cautious approach due to possible interactions with medications and the risk of adverse effects. Furthermore, symptoms associated with these conditions are often exacerbated by common interventions in patients with cirrhosis, such as band ligation for oesophageal varices.

CONCLUSIONS

Oesophageal disorders are common in cirrhosis and increase the disease burden. These conditions require careful management due to complex symptoms and treatment risks. Proton pump inhibitors and other therapies must be used cautiously, as cirrhosis interventions can worsen symptoms.

Comparison of Diagnostic Accuracy and Diagnostic Adequacy Between Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided and Percutaneous Liver Biopsies: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Observational Studies

A liver biopsy (LB) is a crucial diagnostic tool for evaluating liver diseases and is traditionally performed percutaneously under ultrasound guidance (PC-LB). However, endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) has emerged as an alternative approach, offering potential advantages over conventional techniques. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of EUS-LB using modern core biopsy needles with PC-LB. A comprehensive literature search identified nine studies involving 785 patients that met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis evaluated three primary endpoints: diagnostic adequacy, diagnostic accuracy, and adverse event rates. The results indicated no significant difference in overall diagnostic adequacy (odds ratio: 0.446, 95% CI: 0.192-1.031) or diagnostic accuracy (odds ratio: 1.646, 95% CI: 0.224-12.09) between EUS-LB and PC-LB. Furthermore, the combined occurrence of adverse events did not differ significantly between the two procedures (odds ratio: 0.653, 95% CI: 0.298-1.431). However, PC-LB demonstrated superiority in obtaining a higher number of complete portal tracts (mean difference: -0.985, 95% CI: -1.753 to -0.218), indicating better specimen quality. While both EUS-LB and PC-LB exhibited similar diagnostic performance and safety profiles, PC-LB provided higher-quality specimens, which may be advantageous in cases where accurate diagnosis and staging are critical, such as the evaluation of liver fibrosis. Clinicians should consider factors like specimen quality, procedural preferences, and local expertise when selecting the appropriate biopsy approach tailored to individual patient needs and clinical circumstances.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition for the diagnosis of focal liver lesion

In patients with liver tumors, the histopathology examination can assist in diagnosis, staging, prognosis, and therapeutic management strategy. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition using fine needle aspiration (FNA) or more newly fine needle biopsy (FNB) is a well-developed technique in order to evaluate and differentiate the liver masses. The goal of the EUS-FNA or EUS-FNB is to provide an accurate sample for a histopathology examination. Therefore, malignant tumors such as hepatocarcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma and liver metastasis or benign tumors such as liver adenoma, focal hyperplastic nodular tumors and cystic lesions can be accurately diagnosed using EUS-guided tissue acquisition. EUS-FNB using 19 or 22 Ga needle provide longer samples and a higher diagnostic accuracy in patients with liver masses when compared with EUS-FNA. Few data are available on the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB when compared with percutaneously, ultrasound, computer tomography or transjugulary-guided liver biopsies. This review will discuss the EUS-guided tissue acquisition options in patients with liver tumors and its efficacy and safety in providing accurate samples. The results of the last studies comparing EUS-guided liver biopsy with other conventional techniques are presented. The EUS-guided tissue acquisition using FNB can be a suitable technique in suspected liver lesions in order to provide an accurate histopathology diagnosis, especially for those who require endoscopy.

A safe and effective endoscopic treatment method for simple hepatic cysts (with video)

Background and study aims Symptomatic simple hepatic cysts require treatment, with several guidelines recommending laparoscopic deroofing. However, cysts located in the posterosuperior segments are considered poor candidates for this procedure. Gastrointestinal endoscopes are more flexible and able to reach less accessible areas than laparoscopes. This study aimed to evaluate the utility of endoscopic transgastric hepatic cyst deroofing (ETGHCD) for treatment of simple hepatic cysts. Patients and methods Seven patients with simple hepatic cysts were evaluated between June 2021 and October 2023. The success rate, procedure time, post-procedure length of hospital stays, complications, pathologic diagnosis, and efficacy were recorded. Results Eleven cysts in seven patients (5 men; mean age 65.5 (standard deviation [SD] 8.5) years) were successfully treated without any complications. The mean procedure time was 65.6 minutes (SD 17.2). Mean post-procedure hospitalization was 4.4 days (SD 1.0). The pathologic diagnosis of 11 cysts showed simple hepatic cysts. The size of the cysts was significantly decreased from 337.0 cm 3 (SD 528.8) to 5.2 cm 3 (SD 6.3) 1 month after ETGHCD. During the median 12.7-month follow-up in seven patients, the cysts showed a 99.6% reduction with no recurrence. Conclusions ETGHCD provided a feasible, safe, effective, and minimal invasive alternative approach for the treatment of simple hepatic cysts.

Diagnostic and therapeutic role of endoscopic ultrasound in liver diseases: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In hepatology, the clinical use of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has experienced a notable increase in recent times. These applications range from the diagnosis to the treatment of various liver diseases. Therefore, this systematic review summarizes the evidence for the diagnostic and therapeutic roles of EUS in liver diseases.

AIM

To examine and summarize the current available evidence of the possible roles of the EUS in making a suitable diagnosis in liver diseases as well as the therapeutic accuracy and efficacy.

METHODS

PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases were extensively searched until October 2023. The methodological quality of the eligible articles was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale or Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. In addition, statistical analyses were performed using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software.

RESULTS

Overall, 45 articles on EUS were included (28 on diagnostic role and 17 on therapeutic role). Pooled analysis demonstrated that EUS diagnostic tests had an accuracy of 92.4% for focal liver lesions (FLL) and 96.6% for parenchymal liver diseases. EUS-guided liver biopsies with either fine needle aspiration or fine needle biopsy had low complication rates when sampling FLL and parenchymal liver diseases (3.1% and 8.7%, respectively). Analysis of data from four studies showed that EUS-guided liver abscess had high clinical (90.7%) and technical success (90.7%) without significant complications. Similarly, EUS-guided interventions for the treatment of gastric varices (GV) have high technical success (98%) and GV obliteration rate (84%) with few complications (15%) and rebleeding events (17%).

CONCLUSION

EUS in liver diseases is a promising technique with the potential to be considered a first-line therapeutic and diagnostic option in selected cases.

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

BACKGROUND

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Quantitative analysis of tissue area of endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy specimens using 19-gauge fine-needle biopsy needle in patients with diffuse liver disease: A single-center retrospective study

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) is a novel liver biopsy technique. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-LB in comparison with percutaneous liver biopsy (PLB).

METHODS

This retrospective study evaluated the safety and efficacy of EUS-LB using a 19-gauge fine needle biopsy (FNB) needle compared with PLB using a spring-loaded 16-gauge needle in patients with diffuse liver disease at our hospital from April 2017 to December 2020. The primary outcomes included the total hepatic tissue surface area and the total number of portal tracts. Secondary outcomes included the success and adverse event rates.

RESULTS

Twenty patients each underwent EUS-LB and PLB. There was no statistical difference in the sum of liver tissue surface area (22 mm² vs 22.6 mm² , P = .910) and the total number of portal tracts (29 vs 25, P = .916). The success rate was 95% (19/20) for EUS-LB and 100% (20/20) for PLB (P = 1). There were two adverse events in the PLB group but none in the EUS-LB group (P = .487).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy using FNB has an optimal tissue yield and success rate and is safe compared to PLB. Thus, EUS-LB may be a new alternative to PLB.

The Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Hepatology

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has been an indispensable and widely used diagnostic tool in several medical fields, including gastroenterology, cardiology, and urology, due to its diverse therapeutic and diagnostic applications. Many studies show that it is effective and safe in patients with liver conditions where conventional endoscopy or cross-sectional imaging are inefficient or when surgical interventions pose high risks. In this article, we present a review of the current literature for the different diagnostic and therapeutic applications of EUS in liver diseases and their complications and discuss the potential future application of artificial intelligence analysis of EUS.

EUS-guided versus percutaneous liver biopsy: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis of outcomes

EUS-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) has gained momentum in recent years, especially with availability of newer needle designs. Given the emerging comparative data on EUS-LB with second-generation needles and percutaneous LB (PC-LB), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the safety and efficacy of the two techniques. We searched multiple databases from inception through November 2021 to identify studies comparing outcomes of EUS-LB and PC-LB. Pooled estimates were calculated using a random-effects model, and the results were expressed in terms of pooled proportions and odds ratio (OR) along with relevant 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Five studies with 748 patients were included in the final analysis. EUS-LB was performed in 276 patients and PC-LB in 472 patients. Across all studies, PC-LB had an overall higher diagnostic accuracy than EUS-LB, 98.6% confidence interval (CI: 94.7-99.7) versus 88.3% (49.6-98.3), OR: 1.65, P = 0.04. On assessing data from randomized controlled trials, there was no difference between the two. While pooled diagnostic adequacy and overall adverse events were not significantly different between PC-LB and EUS-LB, the former was superior in terms of the mean number of complete portal tracts (CPT) and total specimen length. PC-LB and EUS-LB produce similar results. PC-LB allows obtaining longer samples and more CPT. Further studies are needed to see if these trends hold up as more providers begin to perform EUS-LB.

EUS-guided left lobe liver biopsy: Safer modality with similar diagnostic yield as right lobe: a pilot study

Background and study aims  Percutaneous liver biopsy is traditionally done on the right lobe of the liver. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) can be performed on either the left or right lobe or as a combined bi-lobar biopsy. Earlier studies did not compare the benefit of bi-lobar biopsies to single-lobe biopsy for reaching a tissue diagnosis. The current study compared the degree of agreement of pathological diagnosis between the left lobe of the liver compared to right-lobe and with bi-lobar biopsy. Patients and methods  Fifty patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria were enrolled in the study. EUS-LB with a 22G core needle was performed separately on both the liver lobes. Three pathologists, who were blinded to the site of biopsy independently reviewed the liver biopsies. Sample adequacy, safety, and concordance of pathological diagnosis between left- and right-lobe biopsy of the liver were analyzed. Results  The pathological diagnosis was made in 96 % of patients. Specimen lengths from the left lobe and the right lobe were 2.31 ± 0.57 cm and 2.28 ± 0.69 cm, respectively ( P  = 0.476). The respective number of portal tracts were 11.84 ± 6.71 versus 9.58 ± 7.14; P  = 0.106. Diagnosis between the two lobes showed substantial (κ = 0.830) concordance. Left-lobe (κ value 0.878) and right-lobe (κ = 0.903) biopsies showed no difference when compared with bi-lobar biopsies. Adverse events were observed in two patients, both of whom had biopsies of the right lobe. Conclusions  EUS-guided left-lobe liver biopsy is safer than right-lobe biopsy with similar diagnostic yield.

Advances in Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-Guided Liver Biopsy

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

Diagnostic and interventional EUS in hepatology: An updated review

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

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Liver Biopsy in Clinical Practice

Background and Aims

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided portal pressure gradient with liver biopsy: 6 years of endo-hepatology in practice

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The portal pressure gradient (PPG) is a useful predictor of portal hypertension (PH) related complications. We previously showed the feasibility and safety of endoscopic ultrasound guided PPG measurement (EUS-PPG). Now EUS-guided liver biopsy (EUS-bx) has been shown to be a safe and effective alternative to percutaneous or Interventional Radiology-guided liver biopsy for the diagnosis of chronic liver disease (CLD). We aimed to evaluate the correlation between PPG and clinical markers of PH, and assess the feasibility and safety of concomitant, single session EUS-PPG and EUS-bx.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of patients undergoing EUS-PPG for CLD at a single tertiary endoscopy center between February 2014 and March 2020. EUS-PPG was performed using a 25-gauge needle and compact manometer. Data analysis was performed with SAS version 9.4.

RESULTS

Eighty-three patients underwent EUS-PPG with 100% technical success. The mean PPG was 7.06 mmHg (SD 6.09, range 0-27.3). PPG was higher in patients with (vs without) clinical features of cirrhosis (9.46 vs 3.61 mmHg, P < 0.0001), esophageal or gastric varices (13.88 vs 4.34 mmHg, P < 0.0001), and thrombocytopenia (9.25 vs 4.71 mmHg, P = 0.0022). In the 71 patients (85.5%) who underwent EUS-bx, 70 (98.6%) specimens were deemed adequate by the pathologist for histologic diagnosis. There were no early or late major adverse events.

CONCLUSION

EUS-PPG correlates well with clinical markers of PH. EUS-bx can be performed safely during the same session as EUS-PPG, providing a comprehensive endoscopic evaluation of the patient with CLD.

Role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) is an evolving technique. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the value of EUS-LB for parenchymal and focal liver lesions. Besides, we aimed to assess the influences of needle-related factors on the performance of EUS-LB. Additionally, we aimed to assess the influence of various criteria on specimen adequacy.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library databases up to 10 October 2021. The primary outcome was diagnostic yield, specimen adequacy, qualified specimens evaluated by rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE). The secondary outcome was adverse events. Subgroup analyses were based on needle type, needle size, fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle type. A sensitivity analysis was conducted on specimen adequacy based on two definition criteria.

RESULTS

In total, 33 studies were included. Pooled rates of diagnostic yield, specimen adequacy, qualified specimen by ROSE, adverse events were 95%, 84%, 93%, 3%. Subgroup analyses showed that Acquire needles generated higher diagnostic yield than SharkCore needles (99% vs. 88%, p = .047). Additionally, FNB needles demonstrated a higher rate of adverse events than FNA needles (6% vs. 1%, p = .028). Sensitivity analysis on specimen adequacy based on various criteria demonstrated that the specimen adequacy rate defined by the AASLD criterion was lower than that of the commonly-used criterion (37% vs. 84%, p = .001).

CONCLUSION

EUS-LB is effective and safe for liver biopsy. Acquire needles provide better specimens than SharkCore needles. FNB needles may increase the risk of adverse events compared with FNA needles. The AASLD criterion is harder to achieve than the commonly-used criterion.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Liver Biopsy

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) has emerged as a safe and effective alternative to percutaneous and trans-jugular approaches for hepatic tissue acquisition. It has shown superior diagnostic yield for the targeted approach of focal lesions, less sampling variability, improved patient comfort, and safety profile. These advantages have contributed to the increased use of EUS-LB as a technique for obtaining liver tissue. In this review, we provide an update on the recent evidence of EUS-LB for the evaluation of liver disease.

EUS-guided fine-needle liver biopsy in pediatric patients using a modified technique with one-pass, one-actuation wet suction

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Liver biopsy (LB) can be a valuable tool to determine the etiology of pediatric liver disease. There is limited data of the role of EUS-LB in children. We have evaluated the efficacy and the safety of a modified technique (M)LB in high risk or obese children. Additionally, we aimed to compare the tissue yield of EUS-(M)LB and percutaneous (PC) approach.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis comparing EUS-(M)LB and PC-LB in children at a tertiary referral center. All consecutive children referred for PC-LB and EUS-LB who had an unexplained liver test abnormality after exclusion of biliary disorders from march-2017 to August-2018 were included. EUS-(M)LB consists of a one pass wet suction technique using a 19-gauche core needle. Comparison between total specimen length (TSL) and number of complete portal triads (CPTs) between the groups were performed.

RESULTS

There were 28 EUS-(M)LB and 28 PC-LB pediatric cases. The median (IQR) age was 14.5 years (13.4-16). The median TSL was 8.6 (5.8-9.6) in EUS-(M)LB cases and 7 cm (7-9) in PC-LB cases (P =0.788). The maximum intact specimen was 2.8 cm (EUS-(M)LB) and 1.6 cm (PC-LB) (P =0.009). The mean (SD) number of CPTs per sample was 28.2 (7.3) and 11.6 (2.1), respectively (P =0.001). Adverse events included once case of self-limited abdominal pain in the PC-LB group.

CONCLUSION

EUS-(M)LB has the potential to be a safe and effective alternative diagnostic modality, at when compared to PC-LB, to evaluate children with unexplained liver test abnormalities who undergo EUS to evaluate biliary disorders.

Liver Biopsy in Pregnancy: Two Case Reports and Review of the Literature

The etiology of most cases of liver diseases in pregnancy can be diagnosed with a thorough history, physical examination, laboratory values, serology, and noninvasive imaging. However, atypical clinical and laboratory presentations of liver diseases/chemistries require a liver biopsy to render an accurate diagnosis in cases where the biopsy results affect the timing of delivery or impact choice of medical therapy. According to the American College of Gastroenterology, liver biopsy can be effectively and safely conducted in pregnant women. Conventional routes of performing a liver biopsy include the percutaneous, transjugular route, and surgical methods. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy is a recent technique that has not yet gained widespread adoption but can potentially serve as an alternative route for obtaining the liver sample. Adverse events associated with liver biopsy include abdominal pain and hemorrhage. Maternal and fetal outcomes are limited to increased risk of preterm birth and small for gestational age neonate. However, very few studies have formally evaluated the safety of liver biopsy in pregnant women. In this review, we present two successful cases of liver biopsy performed during pregnancy and summarize the most recent evidence regarding the safety and outcomes of the procedure in pregnancy to assist clinicians in their decision to perform a liver biopsy during pregnancy or postpone it until after delivery.

Role of endoscopic ultrasound in the field of hepatology: Recent advances and future trends

The role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) as a diagnostic and therapeutic modality for the management of various gastrointestinal diseases has been expanding. The imaging or intervention for various liver diseases has primarily been the domain of radiologists. With the advances in EUS, the domain of endosonologists is rapidly expanding in the field of hepatology. The ability to combine endoscopy and sonography in one hybrid device is a unique property of EUS, together with the ability to bring its probe/transducer near the liver, the area of interest. Its excellent spatial resolution and ability to provide real-time images coupled with several enhancement techniques, such as contrast-enhanced (CE) EUS, have facilitated the growth of EUS. The concept of “Endo-hepatology” encompasses the wide range of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures that are now gradually becoming feasible for managing various liver diseases. Diagnostic advancements can enable a wide array of techniques from elastography and liver biopsy for liver parenchymal diseases, to CE-EUS for focal liver lesions to portal pressure measurements for managing various liver conditions. Similarly, therapeutic advancements range from EUS-guided eradication of varices, drainage of bilomas and abscesses to various EUS-guided modalities of liver tumor management. We provide a comprehensive review of all the different diagnostic and therapeutic EUS modalities available for the management of various liver diseases. A synopsis of all the technical details involving each procedure and the available data has been tabulated, and the future trends in this area have been highlighted.

Endoscopic tissue sampling - Part 1: Upper gastrointestinal and hepatopancreatobiliary tracts. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline

1: ESGE recommends that, where there is a suspicion of eosinophilic esophagitis, at least six biopsies should be taken, two to four biopsies from the distal esophagus and two to four biopsies from the proximal esophagus, targeting areas with endoscopic mucosal abnormalities. Distal and proximal biopsies should be placed in separate containers.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. 2: ESGE recommends obtaining six biopsies, including from the base and edge of the esophageal ulcers, for histologic analysis in patients with suspected viral esophagitis.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. 3: ESGE recommends at least six biopsies are taken in cases of suspected advanced esophageal cancer and suspected advanced gastric cancer.Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. 4: ESGE recommends taking only one to two targeted biopsies for lesions in the esophagus or stomach that are potentially amenable to endoscopic resection (Paris classification 0-I, 0-II) in order to confirm the diagnosis and not compromise subsequent endoscopic resection.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. 5: ESGE recommends obtaining two biopsies from the antrum and two from the corpus in patients with suspected Helicobacter pylori infection and for gastritis staging.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. 6: ESGE recommends biopsies from or, if endoscopically resectable, resection of gastric adenomas.Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. 7: ESGE recommends fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles equally for sampling of solid pancreatic masses.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 8: ESGE suggests performing peroral cholangioscopy (POC) and/or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition in indeterminate biliary strictures. For proximal and intrinsic strictures, POC is preferred. For distal and extrinsic strictures, EUS-guided sampling is preferred, with POC where this is not diagnostic.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 9: ESGE suggests obtaining possible non-neoplastic biopsies before sampling suspected malignant lesions to prevent intraluminal spread of malignant disease.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. 10: ESGE suggests dividing EUS-FNA material into smears (two per pass) and liquid-based cytology (LBC), or the whole of the EUS-FNA material can be processed as LBC, depending on local experience.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.

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

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

Single-pass 1-needle actuation versus single-pass 3-needle actuation technique for EUS-guided liver biopsy sampling: a randomized prospective trial (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Several reports have validated EUS-guided liver biopsy sampling (EUS-LB) as safe and effective. Nineteen-gauge EUS aspiration (FNA) or core (fine-needle biopsy [FNB]) needles are used, but different needle techniques can yield variable outcomes. Some data show that 1 pass (single liver puncture) with 1 actuation (1 to-and-fro needle movement) may be enough to obtain a satisfactory specimen. However, there has not been a head-to-head comparison of single versus multiple needle actuations for EUS-LB.

METHODS

This was a prospective randomized trial of EUS-LB in 40 patients comparing tissue yields and adequacy using 1 pass, 1 actuation (1:1) versus 1 pass 3 actuations (1:3) of an FNB needle. The primary outcome was number of complete portal triads (CPTs). Secondary outcomes were length of the longest piece, aggregate specimen length, number of cores >9 mm, and adverse events (AEs). Computerized randomization determined selection (either 1:1 or 1:3 with fanning technique). Sample lengths were measured before pathologic processing.

RESULTS

Both groups had similar demographics and indications for EUS-LB. All biopsy samples were adequate for pathologic interpretation. Compared with 1:1, biopsy sampling with 1:3 yielded more CPTs (mean [standard deviation], 17.25 [6.2] vs 24.5 [9.88]; P < .008) and longer aggregate specimen length (6.89 cm [1.86] vs 12.85 cm [4.02]; P < .001). AEs were not statistically different between the techniques. No severe AEs were noted.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-LB using the 1:3 technique produced longer liver cores with more CPTs than the 1:1 technique with an equivalent safety profile. Two needle passes are more likely to provide tissue adequacy according to the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases guidelines. (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN 000040101.).

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

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

A prospective, head-to-head comparison of 2 EUS-guided liver biopsy needles in vivo

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Procedural standardization in endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) is necessary to obtain core biopsy specimens for accurate diagnosis. The objective of this study was to directly compare the diagnostic yield of 2 EUS-LB fine-needle biopsy (FNB) systems in vivo.

METHODS

In this prospective, single-center study, 108 adult patients undergoing EUS-LB over a 1-year period were included. Each EUS-LB consisted of an EGD, followed by EUS-guided biopsy of the left lobe of the liver sequentially using 2 different 19-gauge needles: the fork-tip (SharkCore) and Franseen (Acquire) FNB systems. Specimens were then reviewed by a GI histopathologist to determine diagnostic adequacy as well as the number of complete portal tracts, specimen length, and degree of fragmentation.

RESULTS

In 79.4% of cases, the fork-tip FNB system yielded a final diagnosis compared with 97.2% of the Franseen FNB specimens (P < .001). The mean number of complete portal tracts in the fork-tip FNB samples was 7.07 compared with 9.59 in the Franseen FNB samples (P < .001). The mean specimen length was 13.86 mm for the fork-tip FNB and 15.81 mm for the Franseen FNB (P = .004). Cores were intact in 47.6% of the fork-tip FNB samples and in 75.2% of the Franseen FNB samples (P = .004).

CONCLUSIONS

In EUS-LB, we found that the 19-gauge Franseen FNB system resulted in a statistically significant increase in diagnostic adequacy compared with biopsy using the fork-tip FNB system.

Comparison of Two Specialized Histology Needles for Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-Guided Liver Biopsy: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

EUS-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) has been shown to be a safe and effective alternative to percutaneous liver biopsy. The optimal needle device and technique for EUS-LB is still evolving. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of two second-generation 19G fine-needle biopsy (FNB) (Franseen- and Fork-tip) devices for EUS-LB.

METHODS

This is a repeated-measure crossover study with a prospectively maintained cohort of patients. We performed EUS-LB with a one-pass and single-actuation method using two 19G FNB needles in 22 consecutive patients between 10/2018 and 9/2019. Patients were randomized to left vs right liver lobes to be biopsied as well as the needle sequence. The specimens obtained were evaluated for adequacy for histologic diagnosis. The primary outcome was number of complete portal tracts (CPTs), post-fix aggregate, and longest specimen length. Secondary outcomes were prefix aggregate specimen length and the specimen adequacy judged by two expert pathologists.

RESULTS

A total of 44 liver biopsies were performed in 22 patients. The CPTs were higher in the Franseen-tip needle group compared to the Fork-tip needle group (14.4 vs 9.5, p = 0.043). Post-fix aggregate specimen length (44.9 mm vs 34.6 mm, p = 0.097), the post-fix longest specimen length (19.9 mm vs 13.7 mm, p = 0.175), and prefix aggregate specimen length (51.7 mm vs 45 mm, p = 0.265) were not significantly different. Both needles showed similarly high histologic adequacy (100% vs 95.5%, p = 0.312). Interestingly, the right of the liver showed higher yield of CPTs with both needles (Franseen, 16.2 vs. 12.8, p = 0.003, the Fork-tip, 12.8 vs. 7.0, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

EUS-guided liver biopsy using the 19G Franseen-tip needle may provide more CPTs than 19G Fork-tip needle on a single-pass, single-actuation comparison.

Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound: Current Status and Future Directions

The evolution of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) from a diagnostic to a therapeutic procedure has resulted in a paradigm shift toward endoscopic management of disease states that previously required percutaneous or surgical approaches. The past few years have seen additional techniques and devices that have enabled endoscopists to expand its diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities. Some of these techniques initially were reported more than a decade ago; however, with further device development and refinement in techniques there is potential for expanding the application of these techniques and new technologies to a broader group of interventional gastroenterologists. Lack of formalized training, devices, and prospective data regarding their use in addition to a scarcity of guidelines on implementation of these technologies into clinical practice are contributing factors impeding the growth of the field of interventional EUS. In April 2019, the American Gastroenterological Association's Center for Gastrointestinal Innovation and Technology conducted its annual Tech Summit and a key session focused on interventional EUS. This article is a White Paper generated from the conference, discusses the published literature pertaining to the topic of interventional EUS, and outlines a proposed framework for the implementation of interventional EUS techniques into clinical practice. Three primary areas of interventional EUS are addressed: (1) EUS-guided access; (2) EUS-guided tumor ablation; and (3) endohepatology. There was general agreement among participants on several key components. The introduction of these novel interventions requires better tools, more data on safety/outcomes, and improved training for endoscopists. Participants also agreed that widespread implementation and use of these techniques will require support from Gastrointestinal Societies and other key stakeholders including payers. Continued work by the Gastrointestinal Societies and manufacturers to provide training programs, appropriate equipment/work environments, and policies that motivate endoscopists to adopt new techniques is essential for growing the field of interventional EUS.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided hepatic interventions

Intervention for liver disease has predominantly been performed through the percutaneous approach. However, as endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) applications have expanded, there have emerged various EUS-guided interventions for liver disease, a space we call "Endo-Hepatology". EUS-guided liver biopsy can be considered the "forerunner" of Endo-Hepatology and has become a clinical option for patients requiring histologic diagnosis and staging of their liver disease. EUS also enables direct access to the portal vein. Subsequently, many procedures are being explored, such as angiography, measurement of the portosystemic pressure gradient, portal vein sampling to detect cancer cell or DNA, and EUS-guided transhepatic intrahepatic portosystemic shunt creation. Since the transducer is close to the liver, especially the left and caudate lobes, EUS can be used as a rescue when the percutaneous approach is not favorable and EUS-guided treatments of liver tumor, cyst and abscess have been reported. This review summarizes the available studies of EUS-guided intervention in the liver.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration Using a 22-G Needle for Hepatic Lesions: Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has been accepted as a reliable tool in diagnosing and staging intra-abdominal tumors. In this study, we aimed to investigate the performance of EUS-FNA in the evaluation of liver masses and its impact on patient management and procedure-related complications retrospectively.

METHODS

Data of patients who underwent EUS-FNA biopsies due to liver masses between November 2017 and July 2018 were retrieved retrospectively. Biopsies were performed using 22-G needles. The demographics, EUS-FNA results, sensitivity and specificity of the procedure, negative predictive value, positive predictive value, and specimen sufficiency rates were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 25 patients (10 females) were included in the study. The mean age was 62.73±15.2 years. The mean size of the masses was 34.50±16.04 mm. The technical success rate was 88%. During the EUS-FNA procedure, each patient had only one pass with 94.45% of aspirate sufficiency rate and 86.3% of biopsy sufficiency rate. The diagnostic accuracy rate was 86.3%. There were no complications.

CONCLUSION

For the evaluation of liver masses, EUS-FNA using a 22-G needle with even one pass had high aspiration and biopsy success rates accompanied with high diagnostic accuracy rates.

Superior Specimen and Diagnostic Accuracy with Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Liver Biopsies Using 19 G versus 22 G Core Needles

Background/Aims

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) is an effective and safe method of procuring liver tissue. The aims of this study were to assess and compare the outcomes and tissue adequacy of a single-pass, single-actuation, wet suction technique between 19 G and 22 G needles in patients undergoing EUS-LB.

Methods

We performed a prospective case series study of 20 patients undergoing EUS-LB at a single center between September 2017 and April 2020. The primary objective was to evaluate differences in sample adequacy via a single actuation wet suction technique between a 19 G core needle and a 22 G core needle. Adequacy was gauged by cumulative core biopsy length and the number of portal tracts visualized.

Results

The 19 G needle provided a longer core length (2.5 cm vs. 1.2 cm, p<0.0001), more complete portal tracts (5.8 vs. 1.7, p<0.0001), more total tracts (8.8 vs. 3, p<0.0001), and a longer, intact, fragment length (0.75 cm vs. 0.32 cm, p<0.0006). The 19 G needle was superior in providing adequate (60% vs. 5%, p<0.001) and diagnostic pathologic samples (85% vs. 10%, p<0.001).

Conclusions

A single-pass, single-actuation, wet suction technique using a 19 G needle is superior to that using a 22 G needle for tissue acquisition and sample adequacy in EUS-LB.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy using a 20-gauge fine needle biopsy needle with the wet-heparinized suction technique

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the histological adequacy of the liver tissue specimens obtained with a 20-gauge fine-needle biopsy needle and the secondary aim was to test the safety endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy with a 20-gauge fine-needle biopsy needle with the wet-heparinized suction technique.

METHODS

Forty patients who underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy were included in the study. A 20-gauge fine-needle biopsy needle was used with the wet-heparinized suction technique to make one pass each from the left and the right lobe. Histologic characteristics of the specimens were evaluated, and patients were observed after the procedure in order to intervene in case of an adverse event.

RESULTS

The median longest core fragment was 22 mm from the left lobe [first quartile-third quartile 20-25 mm, interquartile range (IQR) 5 mm], and 20 mm (first quartile-third quartile 17-22 mm, IQR 5 mm) from the right lobe. The median cumulative core length per patient was 103 mm (91-108 mm, IQR 17 mm). The median cumulative number of complete portal triads per patient was 69.50 (52.25-82.25, IQR 30). The rate of diagnostic yield was 100%. Post-biopsy self-limiting abdominal pain was reported in two patients (5%). The most common histologic diagnosis was fatty liver disease (25%).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy with the wet-heparinized suction technique using a 20-gauge fine-needle biopsy needle is a safe alternative method in clinical practice.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided parenchymal liver biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided liver biopsy is a novel technique to obtain adequate liver samples for diagnosis of liver parenchymal diseases. There are studies that have evaluated the feasibility and safety of EUS-guided parenchymal liver biopsy (EUS-LB), however, factors that can influence specimen quality are yet to be determined. Our aim was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-LB and evaluate factors associated with specimen quality.

METHODS

We performed a detailed search of PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science™ databases to identify studies in which results of EUS-guided liver parenchymal biopsies were reported published up to July 2020. A random effects model was used to estimate pooled values (mean ± SE) for total specimen length (TSL) and complete portal tracts (CPT). Subgroup analyses were applied to find out the procedural factors associated with better specimen quality using Cochran's Q test. A total of 10 meta-analyses were done focusing on international studies. Total of 1326 patients who underwent EUS-LB. EUS-LBs performed for suspicion of parenchymal liver disease. Pooled mean values for TSL and CPT with subgroup analyses.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies with a total of 1326 patients were included in our meta-analysis. Overall pooled mean TSL and CPT were 45.3 ± 4.6 mm and 15.8 ± 1.5, respectively. In subgroup analysis, core biopsy needles proved to better in terms of CPT than fine-needle aspiration needles (18.4 vs 10.99, p = 0.003). FNB with slow-pull or suction technique provided a similar TSL (44.3 vs 53.9 mm, p = 0.40), however, slow-pull technique was better in terms of CPT (30 vs 14.6, p < 0.001). Heterogeneity was present among the studies. Another limitation is the low number randomized control trials.

CONCLUSION

EUS-guided parenchymal liver biopsy is a good alternative to other methods of liver sampling. Using FNB needles with a slow-pull technique can provide better results.

Advances in Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS): A Technical Review

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has become the therapeutic intervention of choice for multiple diseases and continues to evolve rapidly. Its increasing use has allowed the development and adaptation of multiple, revolutionary devices and tools. Currently, there is paucity of randomized clinical trials evaluating multiple EUS-guided interventions and the vast majority of published data is heterogenous. However, the available literature on EUS-guided therapeutic interventions continues to expand and demonstrate its safety, efficacy and cost effectiveness in carefully selected patients when performed by expert endosonographers. The future of interventional EUS appears to be bright!

A State-of-the-Art Review on the Evolving Utility of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Liver Diseases Diagnosis

Liver diseases are amongst the most common diseases worldwide and manifest as a parenchymatic and/or biliary injury due to several causes as well as focal liver lesions, ranging from benign to malignant ones. The diagnosis of liver diseases is based mainly on biochemical and advanced imaging studies and, when required, on liver biopsy. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), which combines endoscopy and ultrasonography, is one of the main examination techniques used in gastroenterology as it is applied to evaluate abnormalities in the lumen of the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract and to define pancreatic and hepato-biliary features, often in chronic patients. Given its high spatial resolution and its proximity to the liver, EUS is gaining popularity in the diagnostic work up of liver diseases. This is a comprehensive overview of the current literature on the diagnostic indications for EUS use in patients with liver diseases. We performed a MEDLINE\PubMed and Embase search, and all articles that were relevant, after reviewing abstracts, were assessed and the full text was analyzed to extract data regarding technical success, diagnostic yield, bioptic characteristics, and complications rate. EUS-guided imaging and biopsy techniques in liver diseases have shown consistent favorable promising results among the reports through the literature, with an excellent diagnostic yield and safety profile, especially in the context of focal lesions and portal hypertension. The application of EUS in the diagnosis of liver diseases is a promising technique and should be considered as a first-line therapeutic option in selected cases.

Endoscopic ultrasound in chronic liver disease

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is a minimally invasive diagnostic and therapeutic modality with a number of established as well as evolving uses in patients with chronic liver disease. Compared to other diagnostic tools such as cross-sectional imaging or conventional endoscopy, EUS has been shown to increase diagnostic sensitivity and therapeutic success for many clinical scenarios and applications with a low rate of adverse events. In this review, we discuss and focus on the current and growing role of EUS in the evaluation and/or treatment of hepatobiliary masses, hepatic parenchymal disease, portal hypertension, esophageal and other varices, and indeterminate biliary strictures.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided liver biopsy: Recent evidence

Liver biopsy (LB) is an essential tool in diagnosing, evaluating and managing various diseases of the liver. As such, histopathological results are critical as they establish or aid in diagnosis, provide information on prognosis, and guide the appropriate selection of medical therapy for patients. Indications for LB include evaluation of persistent elevation of liver chemistries of unclear etiology, diagnosis of chronic liver diseases such as Wilson's disease, autoimmune hepatitis, small duct primary sclerosing cholangitis, work up of fever of unknown origin, amyloidosis and more. Traditionally, methods of acquiring liver tissue have included percutaneous LB (PCLB), transjugular LB (TJLB) or biopsy taken surgically via laparotomy or laparoscopy. However, traditional methods of LB may be inferior to newer methods. Additionally, PCLB and TJLB carry higher risks of adverse events and complications. More recently, endoscopic ultrasound guided LB (EUS-LB) has evolved as an alternative method of tissue sampling that has proven to be safe and effective, with limited adverse events. Compared to PC and TJ routes, EUS-LB may also have a greater diagnostic yield of tissue, be superior for a targeted approach of focal lesions, provide higher quality images and allow for greater patient comfort. These advantages have contributed to the increased use of EUS-LB as a technique for obtaining liver tissue. Herein, we provide a review of the recent evidence of EUS-LB for liver disease.

An international, multi-institution survey on performing EUS-FNA and fine needle biopsy

Background and Objectives

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and fine needle biopsy (FNB) are effective techniques that are widely used for tissue acquisition. However, it remains unclear how to obtain high-quality specimens. Therefore, we conducted a survey of EUS-FNA and FNB techniques to determine practice patterns worldwide and to develop strong recommendations based on the experience of experts in the field.

Methods

This was a worldwide multi-institutional survey among members of the International Society of EUS Task Force (ISEUS-TF). The survey was administered by E-mail through the SurveyMonkey website. In some cases, percentage agreement with some statements was calculated; in others, the options with the greatest numbers of responses were summarized. Another questionnaire about the level of recommendation was designed to assess the respondents' answers.

Results

ISEUS-TF members developed a questionnaire containing 17 questions that was sent to 53 experts. Thirty-five experts completed the survey within the specified period. Among them, 40% and 54.3% performed 50-200 and more than 200 EUS sampling procedures annually, respectively. Some practice patterns regarding FNA/FNB were recommended.

Conclusion

This is the first worldwide survey of EUS-FNA and FNB practice patterns. The results showed wide variations in practice patterns. Randomized studies are urgently needed to establish the best approach for optimizing the FNA/FNB procedures.

Long-term safety and efficacy of ethanol retention therapy via percutaneous approach and/or EUS guidance for symptomatic large hepatic cysts (with video)

Background and Objectives

Ethanol retention therapy (ERT) under EUS guidance or a percutaneous approach is a safe treatment for large symptomatic hepatic cysts. However, reports on the long-term outcomes after ERT are very rare. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of ERT in symptomatic large hepatic cysts.

Materials and Methods

A total of 47 consecutive patients with large symptomatic hepatic cysts treated at the Asan Medical Center from April 2009 to October 2017 were analyzed. Thirty patients with right hepatic cysts were treated with ERT through a percutaneous approach, and 14 patients with left hepatic cysts were treated with ERT under EUS guidance. Three patients were treated with ERT using both methods.

Results

Of the 47 patients, 43 (91%) showed complete regression and four (9%) showed partial regression on abdominal computed tomography. Recurrence of the cysts was not observed during the follow-up surveillance of a median of 66 months.

Conclusions

Percutaneous catheter drainage-guided ERT and EUS-guided ERT, based on their favorable long-term outcomes, may be considered as first-line treatments in patients with large symptomatic hepatic cysts.

The role of EUS in diagnosis and treatment of liver disorders

Background and aim  Transabdominal ultrasound (US), computed tomographic scanning (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are established diagnostic tools for liver diseases. Percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography is used to perform hepatic interventional procedures including biopsy, biliary drainage procedures, and radiofrequency ablation. Despite their widespread use, these techniques have limitations. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), a tool that has proven useful for evaluating the mediastinum, esophagus, stomach, pancreas, and biliary tract, has an expanding role in the field of hepatology complementing the traditional investigational modalities. This review aimed to assess the current scientific evidence regarding diagnostic and therapeutic applications of EUS for hepatic diseases.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Liver Biopsy Using a Core Needle for Hepatic Solid Mass

Background/Aims

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) using a core needle for hepatic solid masses (HSMs). Additionally, the study aimed to assess factors that influence the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB for HSMs.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent EUS-FNB for the pathological diagnosis of HSMs was conducted between January 2013 and July 2017. The procedure had been performed using core needles of different calibers. The assessed variables were mass size, puncture route, needle type, and the number of needle passes.

Results

Fifty-eight patients underwent EUS-FNB for the pathologic evaluation of HSMs with a mean mass size of 21.4±9.2 mm. EUS-FNB was performed with either a 20-G (n=14), 22-G (n=29) or a 25-G core needle (n=15). The diagnostic accuracy for this procedure was 89.7%, but both specimen adequacy for histology and available immunohistochemistry stain were 91.4%. The sensitivity and specificity of EUS-FNB were 89.7% and 100%, respectively. There was one case involving bleeding as a complication, which was controlled with endoscopic hemostasis. According to the multivariate analysis, no variable was independently associated with a correct final diagnosis.

Conclusions

EUS-FNB with core biopsy needle is a safe and highly accurate diagnostic option for assessing HSMs. There were no variable factors associated with diagnostic accuracy.

Comparison of Endoscopic Ultrasound Biopsy Needles for Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Liver Biopsy

Background/Aims

To compare the performance of latest commercially available endoscopic ultrasound biopsy needles.

Methods

Six latest commercially available needles were tested on a freshly harvested bovine liver; the tested needles included three 19 G, one 20 G, and two 22 G needles. Five biopsies were performed per needle with 10 mL of wet suction. The primary outcome was the number of complete portal tracts (CPTs) per needle aspirate. The secondary outcomes were the mean specimen length and mean fragment length. Analysis of variance and Tukey’s test were applied.

Results

All 19 G needles and the 20 G needle yielded similar mean CPTs and were superior to the SharkCore 22 G needle (p<0.001 adjusted for multiplicity). There was no statistically significant difference in total specimen length among the three 19 G needles and the 20 G needle tested. The two 22 G needles performed similarly with respect to the number of CPTs, mean fragment length, and mean specimen length (adjusted p=0.07, p=0.59, and p=0.10, respectively).

Conclusions

The specimen adequacy was similar among the 3 latest commercially available 19 G needles. The endoscopist may choose a larger-bore needle based on availability without concerns of specimen adequacy. Further studies are needed to assess the ease of needle use in various anatomical locations and to confirm the optimal needle design.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided liver biopsy for parenchymal liver disease

Liver biopsy plays an essential role in the diagnosis, evaluation and management of a vast proportion of liver diseases. Conventionally, percutaneous and trans-jugular approaches have been used to obtain liver biopsies. Endoscopic ultrasound guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) has emerged as a safe and effective alternate in the past two decades. EUS-LB carries a role in evaluation of both benign and malignant diseases of the liver. It can offer higher resolution imaging of the liver and can detect smaller lesions than computed tomography scan of the abdomen or ultrasound scans with the option for doppler assistance to reduce complications. Current evidence demonstrates the superiority of EUS-LB for a targeted approach of focal lesion and there is also evidence of less sampling variability in heterogeneous parenchymal pathologies. These advantages combined with an improved safety profile had led to the rapid progress in the development of new techniques, equipment and procedures for EUS-LB. We provide a comprehensive review of EUS-LB for parenchymal liver disease.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Liver Biopsy

There remains an important role for liver biopsy in the management of liver disorders. Image-guided liver biopsy can be obtained with percutaneous or transjugular approaches. Real-time image-guided liver biopsy can be accomplished with endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). EUS-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) has emerged as a safe means of obtaining liver biopsy. EUS-LB confers several advantages over other methods, including the ability to target both lobes of the liver, increased patient comfort and decreased apprehension during the procedure, and shorter recovery time after the biopsy. Future development of technology that allows for EUS-guided portal pressure measurement could further drive EUS-LB use.

Efficacy and safety of EUS-guided liver biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided liver biopsy (LB) is an emerging technique over conventional percutaneous (PC) or transjugular (TJ) approaches. Recent studies have reported that EUS-guided LB may have a better safety profile than PC LB or TJ LB without compromising diagnostic yield, and the outcomes are varied with respect to the types of biopsy needles. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the diagnostic yield, specimen adequacy, and adverse events associated with EUS-guided LB.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases and conference proceedings, including PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases (from inception to June 2018) to identify studies that reported on EUS-guided LB. The primary outcome was to estimate the pooled rates of successful diagnosis made and insufficient specimen obtained. The secondary outcome was to estimate the pooled rate of adverse events. A subgroup analysis compared the outcomes based on the type of biopsy needle.

RESULTS

A total of 9 study arms with 437 patients were included. The pooled rate of successful histologic diagnoses was 93.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 84.9-97.7), with heterogeneity I² of 75.3%. The pooled rate of insufficient specimen obtained was 10.1% (95% CI, 3.5-25.8), with I² = 71.6%. The pooled rate of adverse events with EUS-guided LB was 2.3% (95% CI; 1.1-4.8, I² = 0). On subgroup analysis, the adverse events rate with a 19-gauge FNA needle (vs other core biopsy needles) was 0.9% (vs 2.7%, P = .28), and the rate of diagnostic yield was 95.8% (vs 92.7%, P = .59). The rate of insufficient specimen was significantly lower with an FNA needle compared with the core needle (4% vs 20%, P = .03).

CONCLUSION

With a histologic diagnosis rate of 93.9% and adverse event rate of 2.3%, EUS-guided LB appears to be both effective and safe. A 19-gauge FNA needle provides significantly better biopsy specimens and seems to have better outcomes compared with other core biopsy needles.

The Role of EUS in Liver Biopsy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

EUS-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) is being used with increased frequency to perform parenchymal liver biopsy. Evolution of the technique can now achieve excellent liver tissue cores. This review covers important developments in this procedure.

RECENT FINDINGS

Clinical studies have recently demonstrated that the 19G EUS core biopsy needle is superior to non-core needles for liver tissue acquisition. In addition, wet suction provides more robust tissue samples than dry suction. Heparin priming of the needle (instead of saline) can prevent blood clogging within the needle lumen. A 1-hour recovery time after the EUS-LB is sufficient in almost all cases. The EUS-LB can deliver bilobar biopsies, which can decrease sampling error. Patients who need a liver biopsy in addition to an endoscopy or EUS are best served by the EUS-LB, as the combination procedure saves time and cost. The EUS-LB is a safe and effective means for procuring good liver core biopsies. Incremental improvements in technique have increased quality of the resulting specimen. Future directions of this technique are discussed.

Diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy of focal liver lesions

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) has become an indispensable method for diagnosis and therapeutic procedures in gastroenterology. As experience with this technique grows, new indications continue to emerge. Due to the vicinity of the transducer to the liver, endoscopic ultrasonography provides detailed images of the liver segments and its vascular and biliary structures. Endosonographers have made an effort to define a clinical role for endoscopic ultrasound in liver diseases; however, not much is known about endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in hepatic focal lesions. This review summarizes the available evidence regarding the usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in patients with focal liver lesions.