Diagnosing autoimmune pancreatitis: choosing your weapon

The Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound and Ancillary Techniques in the Diagnosis of Autoimmune Pancreatitis: A Comprehensive Review

Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is a unique form of chronic pancreatitis with a multifactorial pathogenesis. Historically, it has been classified as type 1 and type 2, according to its clinical and histological features. The diagnosis of AIP is challenging and relies on a combination of clinical, histopathologic, serologic, and imaging characteristics. In the available guidelines, the imaging hallmarks of AIP are based on cross-sectional imaging and cholangiopancreatography retrograde endoscopic findings. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is generally used for pancreatic tissue acquisition to rule out pancreatic cancer and diagnose AIP with limited accuracy. Several papers reported the reliability of EUS for providing informative morphologic features of AIP. Nowadays, the improvement in the resolution of EUS conventional images and the development of new ancillary technologies have further increased the diagnostic yield of EUS: contrast-enhanced EUS and EUS elastography are non-invasive and real-time techniques that strongly support the diagnosis and management of pancreatic diseases. In this review article, we will present the role of conventional EUS and ancillary diagnostic techniques in the diagnosis of AIP to support clinicians and endosonographers in managing this condition.

Challenges for clinicians treating autoimmune pancreatitis: Current perspectives

Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is a rare disease clinically characterized by obstructive jaundice, unintentional weight loss, acute pancreatitis, focal pancreatic mass, and diabetes. AIP is classified into two subtypes - type 1 and type 2 - according to pathological findings, clinical features, and serology test results, but some cases may be defined as type not otherwise in the absence of pathological findings and inflammatory bowel disease. To address the differences in diagnostic criteria by country, standard diagnostic criteria for AIP were proposed in 2011 by an international consensus of expert opinions. Differential diagnosis of AIP from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is important but remains challenging for clinicians. Fortunately, all subtypes of AIP show dramatic response to steroid treatment. This review discusses the current perspectives on the diagnosis and management of AIP in clinical practice.

Revisiting the cytologic features of autoimmune pancreatitis: An institutional experience

BACKGROUND

Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is a known mimicker of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma both clinically and radiologically. In this study, the authors present their institutional experience in diagnosing AIP on cytology and correlate results with the histologic findings.

METHODS

A 14-year computerized search for patients who had histologically confirmed AIP with concurrent or prior cytology was performed. Clinical data, cytology findings, and surgical pathology results were reviewed for analysis.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients were identified. The patients showed a male predominance, with a mean age of 59 years. Jaundice, weight loss, and abdominal pain were the most common clinical presentation. Five of 12 patients who were tested for serum immunoglobulin G4 had elevated levels. Cytologic findings of 16 cases that were available for review showed markedly inflamed fibrous stroma (54%) and cytologic atypia (50%). The final cytologic diagnoses were suspicious for adenocarcinoma (n = 1), atypical (n = 8), and benign/negative (n = 9). The corresponding surgical pathology diagnoses were classified as type 1 (n = 10), type 2 (n = 6), and AIP, not otherwise specified (n = 2). All type 2 AIP cases had at least atypical cytologic diagnoses, with one called suspicious for adenocarcinoma and another called adenocarcinoma at the time of rapid on-site evaluation. In contrast, eight of 10 type 1 AIP cases were negative/benign, and two of 10 were atypical. In these two atypical cases, the possibility of AIP was raised because of the presence of inflamed stroma.

CONCLUSION

AIP is a pitfall in cytology because moderate-to-marked atypia can be present, especially in type 2 AIP. Because atypia can be severe, the presence of cellular fibrous stroma with lymphocytic stromal infiltrates and the integration of serum immunoglobulin G4 levels could be helpful in avoiding diagnostic overcall in AIP.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration versus biopsy for diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis: Systematic review and comparative meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is recommended for guiding the acquisition of pancreatic tissue in patients with suspected autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP). Data comparing EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) and fine needle biopsy (FNB) sampling in the diagnosis of AIP are limited.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Ovid MEDLINE databases was conducted until April 2020. The pooled rates of diagnostic yield for the histologic criteria of AIP, histologic tissue procurement, and adverse events were compared between FNA and FNB. Diagnostic yields were also compared between 19 gauge (G) and 22G needles.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included nine studies comprising 309 patients with AIP who underwent FNA and seven studies comprising 131 patients who underwent FNB. The pooled diagnostic yields for level 1 or 2 histology criteria of AIP were 55.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) 37.0-73.9%, I2  = 91.1) for FNA and 87.2% (95% CI 68.8-98.1%, I2  = 69.4) for FNB (P = 0.030). The pooled histologic procurement rates for FNA and FNB were 91.3% (95% CI, 84.9-97.6%, I2  = 82.9) and 87.0% (95% CI, 77.8-96.1%, I2  = 40.0), respectively (P = 0.501). Adverse events were comparable between two groups. When analyzed by needle size, the diagnostic yield was better with a 19G needle than with a 22G needle (88.9% vs. 60.6%, P = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnostic yield may be better with FNB needles than with FNA needles for the diagnosis of AIP, despite the similar rate of histologic tissue procurement. A quantitative definition for the histologic sample adequacy for AIP may be warranted.

The Role of EUS-Guided FNA and FNB in Autoimmune Pancreatitis

Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is an increasingly recognized disease classified into two different subtypes based on histology. According to the International Diagnostic Criteria (ICDC), the diagnosis is achieved using a combination of different criteria. In patients presenting with a typical imaging appearance, the diagnosis may be straightforward, and steroid treatment is recommended, even without histological confirmation. In patients with atypical imaging or mass-forming appearance, the differential diagnosis with pancreatic cancer is challenging and crucial for treatment strategy. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition has been proposed to achieve a histological diagnosis. Fine-needle aspiration (FNA) was first proposed to aspirate cells from pancreatic lesions. Despite excellent results in terms of sensitivity for pancreatic cancer, the data are disappointing regarding the diagnosis of AIP. The recent development of new needles allowing fine-needle biopsy (FNB) has been associated with improved diagnostic accuracy based on preserving the tissue architecture, which is necessary to detect the typical histological features of AIP. However, the published literature on the role of EUS-guided FNA and FNB is limited and mainly focused on type 1 AIP. The present study aimed to review the available literature on the role of EUS-guided FNA and FNB in the diagnosis of AIP.