Comparison of contrast-enhanced versus conventional EUS-guided FNA/fine-needle biopsy in diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: a randomized controlled trial

Comparison of standard vs auxiliary (contrast or elastography) endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration/biopsy in solid pancreatic lesions: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration/biopsy (EUS-FNA/B) is the most common modality for tissue acquisition from pancreatic masses. Despite high specificity, sensitivity remains less than 90%. Auxiliary techniques like elastography and contrast-enhanced EUS may guide tissue acquisition from viable tumor tissue and improve the diagnostic outcomes theoretically. However, data regarding the same have shown conflicting results.

AIM

To compare the diagnostic outcomes of auxiliary-EUS-FNA/B to standard EUS-FNA/B for pancreatic lesions.

METHODS

The electronic databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus were searched from inception to February 2024 for all relevant studies comparing diagnostic outcomes of auxiliary-EUS-FNA/B to standard EUS-FNA/B for pancreatic lesions. A bivariate hierarchical model was used to perform the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies were identified. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver-operated curve (AUROC) for standard EUS-FNA/B were 0.82 (95%CI: 0.79-0.85), 1.00 (95%CI: 0.96-1.00), and 0.97 (95%CI: 0.95-0.98), respectively. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUROC for EUS-FNA/B with auxiliary techniques were 0.86 (95%CI: 0.83-0.89), 1.00 (95%CI: 0.94-1.00), and 0.96 (95%CI: 0.94-0.98), respectively. Comparing the two diagnostic modalities, sensitivity [Risk ratio (RR): 1.04, 95%CI: 0.99-1.09], specificity (RR: 1.00, 95%CI: 0.99-1.01), and diagnostic accuracy (RR: 1.03, 95%CI: 0.98-1.09) were comparable.

CONCLUSION

Analysis of the currently available literature did not show any additional advantage of EUS-FNA/B with auxiliary techniques for pancreatic solid lesions over standard EUS-FNA/B. Further randomized studies are required to demonstrate the benefit of auxiliary techniques before they can be recommended for routine practice.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue sampling: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Technical and Technology Review

This Technical and Technology Review from the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) represents an update of the previous document on the technical aspects of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling in gastroenterology, including the available types of needle, technical aspects of tissue sampling, new devices, and specimen handling and processing. Among the most important new recommendations are:ESGE recommends end-cutting fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles over reverse-bevel FNB or fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needles for tissue sampling of solid pancreatic lesions; FNA may still have a role when rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) is available.ESGE recommends EUS-FNB or mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB) equally for tissue sampling of subepithelial lesions ≥20 mm in size. MIAB could represent the first choice for smaller lesions (<20 mm) if proper expertise is available.ESGE does not recommend the use of antibiotic prophylaxis before EUS-guided tissue sampling of solid masses and EUS-FNA of pancreatic cystic lesions.

Updated techniques and evidence for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition from solid pancreatic lesions

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA), including fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB), has revolutionized specimen collection from intra-abdominal organs, especially the pancreas. Advances in personalized medicine and more precise treatment have increased demands to collect specimens with higher cell counts, while preserving tissue structure, leading to the development of EUS-FNB needles. EUS-FNB has generally replaced EUS-FNA as the procedure of choice for EUS-TA of pancreatic cancer. Various techniques have been tested for their ability to enhance the diagnostic performance of EUS-TA, including multiple methods of sampling at the time of puncture, on-site specimen evaluation, and specimen processing. In addition, advances in next-generation sequencing have made comprehensive genomic profiling of EUS-TA samples feasible in routine clinical practice. The present review describes updates in EUS-TA sampling techniques of pancreatic lesions, as well as methods for their evaluation.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatic Tissue Sampling: Lesion Assessment, Needles, and Techniques

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue sampling includes the techniques of fine needle aspiration (FNA) and fine needle biopsy (FNB), and both procedures have revolutionized specimen collection from the gastrointestinal tract, especially from remote/inaccessible organs. EUS-FNB has replaced FNA as the procedure of choice for tissue acquisition in solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs) across various society guidelines. FNB specimens provide a larger histological tissue core (preserving tissue architecture) with fewer needle passes, and this is extremely relevant in today's era of precision and personalized molecular medicine. Innovations in needle tip design are constantly under development to maximize diagnostic accuracy by enhancing histological sampling capabilities. But, apart from the basic framework of the needle, various other factors play a role that influence diagnostic outcomes, namely, sampling techniques (fanning, aspiration or suction, and number of passes), collection methods, on-site evaluation (rapid, macroscopic, or visual), and specimen processing. The choice taken depends strongly on the endoscopist's preference, available resources at the disposal, and procedure objectives. Hence, in this review, we explicate in detail the concepts and available literature at our disposal on the topic of EUS-guided pancreatic tissue sampling to best guide any practicing gastroenterologist/endoscopist in a not-to-ideal set-up, which EUS-guided tissue acquisition technique is the "best" for their case to augment their diagnostic outcomes.

Identification of Endosonographic Features that Compromise EUS-FNB Diagnostic Accuracy in Pancreatic Masses

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) is highly accurate for diagnosing pancreatic mass. However, making diagnosis is challenging in 5-20% of patients. This study investigated the challenging features associated with reduced diagnostic performance in EUS-FNB and potential rescue methods that can improve the diagnostic rate.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study included patients with solid pancreatic tumors who underwent EUS-FNB between January 1, 2019, and December 12, 2021. Patients without a computed tomography (CT) scan or definite diagnosis were excluded. Challenging features were features that reduced diagnostic accuracy in EUS-FNB, as determined through multivariate analysis. Rescue methods were methods that assisted operators in assessing lesions in patients with challenging features.

RESULTS

Of 332 enrolled patients, an accurate diagnosis obtained using EUS-FNB was achieved in 286 (86.1%). Univariable analysis revealed that the diagnostic accuracy was lower in cases of pancreatic tumors with isoattenuation in CT images (77.3% vs. 89.8%, odds ratio [OR]: 0.39, p = 0.003), an ill-defined margin on EUS (61.2% vs. 92.5%, OR: 0.13, p < 0.001), or tumor size < 20 mm (65.5% vs. 88.1%, OR: 0.26, p = 0.002). However, only ill-defined margins on EUS (OR: 0.14, p < 0.001) and tumor size < 20 mm (OR: 0.25, p = 0.005) were independent predictors of inconclusive EUS-FNB in the multivariate analysis. The use of contrast (OR: 4.46, p = 0.026) and a highly experienced endosonographer (> 5cases/month; OR: 3.25, p = 0.034) improved diagnostic performance in difficult cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Pancreatic tumors with ill-defined tumor margins on EUS or size < 20 mm are challenging features in EUS-FNB. The use of contrast and a highly experienced endosonographer can improve diagnostic performance in difficult cases.

Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound likely does not improve diagnostic adequacy during endoscopic ultrasound guided tissue acquisition: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Solid pancreatic masses are sampled through tissue acquisition by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). Inadequate samples may significantly delay diagnosis, increasing costs and carrying risks to the patients.

AIM

assess the diagnostic adequacy of tissue acquisition using contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasound (CEH-EUS) compared to conventional EUS.

METHODS

Five databases (PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, Scopus and Web of Science) were searched in November 2023. Studies comparing diagnostic adequacy, accuracy and safety using CEH-EUS versus conventional EUS for tissue acquisition of solid pancreatic masses were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RoB2) and the Risk Of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for non-randomized studies, level of evidence using the GRADE approach, Odds Ratios (RR) with 95 % Confidence Intervals (CI) calculated and pooled using a random-effects model. I2 quantified heterogeneity.

RESULTS

The search identified 3858 records; nine studies (1160 patients) were included. OR for achieving an adequate sample was 1.467 (CI: 0.850-2.533), for randomized trials 0.902 (CI: 0.541-1.505), for non-randomized 2.396 (CI: 0.916-6.264), with significant subgroup difference. OR for diagnostic accuracy was 1.326 (CI: 0.890-1977), for randomized trials 0.997 (CI: 0.593-1.977) and for non-randomized studies 1.928 (CI: 1.096-3.393), significant subgroup difference (p = 0.0467). No differences were observed for technical failures or adverse events. Heterogeneity was low, risk of bias "low" to "some concerns" for most outcomes, mostly moderate for non-randomized studies.

CONCLUSION

Non-randomized studies indicated differences in favor of contrast-enhanced EUS, randomized studies showed no difference in diagnostic adequacy, accuracy or sensitivity when using CEH-EUS.

Contrast-enhanced guided endoscopic ultrasound procedures

Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound (CH-EUS) can overcome the limitations of endoscopic ultrasound-guided acquisition by identifying microvessels inside inhomogeneous tumours and improving the characterization of these tumours. Despite the initial enthusiasm that oriented needle sampling under CH-EUS guidance could provide better diagnostic yield in pancreatic solid lesions, further studies did not confirm the supplementary values in cases of tissue acquisition guided by CH-EUS. This review details the knowledge based on the available data on contrast-guided procedures. The indications for CH-EUS tissue acquisition include isoechoic EUS lesions with poor visible delineation where CH-EUS can differentiate the lesion vascularisation from the surrounding parenchyma and also the mural nodules within biliopancreatic cystic lesions, which occur in select cases. Additionally, the roles of CH-EUS-guided therapy in patients whose pancreatic fluid collections or bile ducts that have an echogenic content have indications for drainage, and patients who have nonvisualized vessels that need to be highlighted via Doppler EUS are presented. Another indication is represented if there is a need for an immediate assessment of the post-radiofrequency ablation of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours, in which case CH-EUS can be used to reveal the incomplete tumour destruction.

Endoscopic Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and Fine-Needle Aspiration or Biopsy for the Diagnosis of Pancreatic Solid Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) are currently recommended for the pathologic diagnosis of pancreatic solid lesions (PSLs). The application of contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound (ECEUS) could aid the endoscopist during an FNA and/or FNB procedure. CEUS is indeed able to better differentiate the pathologic tissue from the surrounding healthy pancreatic parenchyma and to detect necrotic areas and vessels.

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to evaluate if ECEUS could reduce the number of needle passes and side effects and increase the diagnostic efficacy of FNA and/or FNB.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search of clinical studies was performed to explore if ECEUS-FNA or FNB could increase diagnostic accuracy and reduce the number of needle passes and adverse effects compared to standard EUS-FNA or FNB. In accordance with the study protocol, a qualitative and quantitative analysis of the evidence was planned.

RESULTS

The proportion of established diagnoses of ECEUS was 90.9% compared to 88.3% of EUS, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.14). The diagnosis was made through a single step in 70.9% of ECEUS patients and in 65.3% of EUS patients, without statistical significance (p = 0.24). The incidence of adverse reactions was substantially comparable across both groups (p = 0.89).

CONCLUSION

ECEUS-FNA and FNB do not appear superior to standard EUS-FNA and FNB for the diagnosis of pancreatic lesions.

Factors Influencing the Diagnostic Performance of Repeat Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration/Biopsy after the First Inconclusive Diagnosis of Pancreatic Solid Lesions

Background/Aims

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration/biopsy (EUS-FNA/B) is essential in diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs), but without rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE), a repeat EUS-FNA/B is crucial for clarifying an inconclusive diagnosis. We aimed to evaluate factors associated with improved diagnostic performance of repeat EUS-FNA/B for initially inconclusive SPL diagnoses without ROSE.

Methods

Of 5,894 patients subjected to EUS-FNA/B, 237 (4.0%) with an initially inconclusive diagnosis of SPLs were retrospectively enrolled from five tertiary medical centers between January 2016 and June 2021. Diagnostic performance and procedural factors of EUS-FNA/B were analyzed.

Results

The diagnostic accuracies of first and repeat EUS-FNA/B were 96.2% and 67.6%, respectively. Of 237 patients with an inconclusive diagnosis from initial EUS-FNA/B, 150 were pathologically diagnosed after repeat EUS-FNA/B. In multivariate analysis of repeat EUS-FNA/B, tumor location (body/tail vs head: odds ratio [OR], 3.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.48 to 9.46), number of needle passes (≥4 vs ≤3: OR, 4.80; 95% CI, 1.44 to 15.99), needle type (FNB vs FNA: OR, 3.26; 95% CI, 1.44 to 7.36), needle size (22 gauge vs 19/20 gauge: OR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.19 to 4.62), and suction method (suction vs others: OR, 5.19; 95% CI, 1.30 to 20.75) were associated with a significantly improved diagnostic performance.

Conclusions

Repeat EUS-FNA/B is essential for patients with an inconclusive EUS-FNA/B without ROSE. To improve the diagnostic performance of repeated EUS-FNA/B, it is recommended that 22-gauge FNB needles, ≥4 needle passes, and suction methods are used.

Randomized trial of contrast-enhanced harmonic guidance versus fanning technique for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling of solid pancreatic lesions

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

For EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling (EUS-FNB) of solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs), the role of sampling strategy between targeted biopsy sampling and wide sampling has not been reported. This study aimed to investigate the benefits of the 2 sampling techniques on EUS-FNB using rapid on-site evaluation.

METHODS

Patients with SPLs were prospectively enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo EUS-FNB using either contrast guidance or the fanning technique. The primary outcome was the total number of passes required to establish a diagnosis, and secondary outcomes were overall diagnostic accuracy and adverse event rates.

RESULTS

One hundred eighteen patients were enrolled from February 2019 to January 2021, with 59 patients assigned to each group. There was no significant difference in the total number of passes required to establish a diagnosis between the contrast and fanning groups (median, 1 [interquartile range, 1-1] vs 1 [interquartile range, 1-2], respectively; P = .629). The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy in the contrast group was 100%, 66.7%, and 98.3% and in the fanning group 100%, 100%, and 100%, respectively (P = 1). An SPL <4 cm (odds ratio, 2.47; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-5.81; P = .037) and macroscopic visible core length >1 cm (odds ratio, 2.89; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-7.84; P = .037) were independently associated with increased cytologic and histologic accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB with the fanning technique for SPLs was comparable with the contrast guidance technique. Without additional cost, EUS-FNB with the fanning technique may be preferred for SPLs. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT04924725.).

Diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasound elastography for differential diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: A propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-elastography (EUS-EG) is a non-invasive complementary diagnostic method for differential diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions (SPL). However, the optimal strain ratio (SR) value and diagnostic performance of EUS-EG have not yet been determined in pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm (PNEN), mass-forming pancreatitis (MFP), and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We aimed to determine the optimal SR value in EUS-EG for differential diagnosis of SPLs.

METHODS

Patients who underwent EUS-EG for SPL evaluation between July 2016 and June 2019 were retrospectively investigated. Patients were divided into three groups based on the final diagnosis (PNEN, MFP, or PDAC). Patient demographics, characteristics of SPL, and EUS-EG were compared.

RESULTS

The mean (± standard deviation) SR value for each group were 11.85 ± 7.56 (PNEN, n = 10), 11.45 ± 5.97 (MFP, n = 37), and 22.50 ± 13.19 (PDAC, n = 87). Multinomial logistic regression analysis revealed that an increase of SR value was significantly associated with PDAC (PNEN versus PDAC, p = 0.0216; MFP versus PDAC, p = 0.0006). The optimal cut-off value for differential diagnosis was confirmed as 17.14 after propensity score matching.

CONCLUSIONS

We provided the optimal cut-off SR values for differential diagnosis between MFP and PDAC. EUS-EG can be used as a supplementary diagnostic method in the diagnosis of SPLs. (Clinical trial registration number: https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris: KCT0002082).

Pancreatic Tumorigenesis: Precursors, Genetic Risk Factors and Screening

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a highly malignant and aggressive tumor. Despite medical advancement, the silent nature of PC results in only 20% of all cases considered resectable at the time of diagnosis. It is projected to become the second leading cause in 2030. Most pancreatic cancer cases are diagnosed in the advanced stages. Such cases are typically unresectable and are associated with a 5-year survival of less than 10%. Although there is no guideline consensus regarding recommendations for screening for pancreatic cancer, early detection has been associated with better outcomes. In addition to continued utilization of imaging and conventional tumor markers, clinicians should be aware of novel testing modalities that may be effective for early detection of pancreatic cancer in individuals with high-risk factors. The pathogenesis of PC is not well understood; however, various modifiable and non-modifiable factors have been implicated in pancreatic oncogenesis. PC detection in the earlier stages is associated with better outcomes; nevertheless, most oncological societies do not recommend universal screening as it may result in a high false-positive rate. Therefore, targeted screening for high-risk individuals represents a reasonable option. In this review, we aimed to summarize the pathogenesis, genetic risk factors, high-risk population, and screening modalities for PC.

Is contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy better than conventional fine needle biopsy? A retrospective study in a medical center

BACKGROUND

Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (CE-EUS-FNA) could help clinicians to precisely locate and puncture lesions, but its effect on the diagnostic yield improvement is controversial. We designed this study to observe the additional benefit of using contrast in EUS-guided tissue sampling while performing fine needle biopsy (FNB) instead of FNA, as FNB results in a higher diagnostic accuracy.

METHOD

Patients who underwent EUS-FNB performed by a single medical team from January 2019 to March 2021 were included in this study. We analyzed the cytopathological diagnostic accuracy rate and number of needle passes between groups who underwent FNB with and without contrast.

RESULT

We divided 133 patients who were diagnosed with a malignancy into two groups according to whether they underwent CE-EUS-FNB (n = 48) or conventional EUS-FNB (n = 85). The CE-EUS-FNB group had an equal diagnostic accuracy rate with fewer needle passes compared with the conventional EUS-FNB group. There was no significant trend change in the success cytopathological diagnostic rate for experienced endoscopists for EUS-FNA.

CONCLUSION

CE-EUS-FNB had fewer needle passes but no additional benefit for diagnostic yield improvement. There was no difficult threshold for CE-EUS-FNB for endoscopists who were well trained in conventional FNA.

The value of endoscopic ultrasonography for differential diagnosis in obstructive jaundice of the distal common bile duct

INTRODUCTION

Obstructive jaundice is a common clinical disease of great significance; however, diagnosing it according to etiology, especially in patients with distal obstructive jaundice is difficult. The development of endoscopic ultrasonography has improved diagnostic methods. Endoscopic ultrasonography not only improves the accuracy of conventional endoscopic ultrasound technology in etiological diagnosis, but also offers several special endoscopic ultrasound technologies for diagnosing distal obstructive jaundice of the common bile duct. What's more, endoscopic ultrasonography can be used to treat distal obstructive jaundice of common bile duct.

AREAS COVERED

This review discusses the diagnostic value and applications of endoscopic ultrasonography for obstructive jaundice of the distal common bile duct.

EXPERT OPINION

This article summarizes the value of endoscopic ultrasonography in the etiological diagnosis, relevant treatment applications of distal obstructive jaundice and the limitations of endoscopic ultrasonography in some etiologies due to the lack of clear comparison with other imaging methods. We also provide new data for the future research direction of endoscopic ultrasonography in distal obstructive jaundice.

The Utility of Endoscopic-Ultrasonography-Guided Tissue Acquisition for Solid Pancreatic Lesions

Endoscopic-ultrasonography-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) has been widely performed for the definitive diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs). As the puncture needles, puncture techniques, and sample processing methods have improved, EUS-TA has shown higher diagnostic yields and safety. Recently, several therapeutic target genomic biomarkers have been clarified in pancreatic ductal carcinoma (PDAC). Although only a small proportion of patients with PDAC can benefit from precision medicine based on gene mutations at present, precision medicine will also be further developed for SPLs as more therapeutic target genomic biomarkers are identified. Advances in next-generation sequencing (NGS) techniques enable the examination of multiple genetic mutations in limited tissue samples. EUS-TA is also useful for NGS and will play a more important role in determining treatment strategies. In this review, we describe the utility of EUS-TA for SPLs.

The Role of Endoscopic Ultrasonography in the Diagnosis and Staging of Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death and the second gastrointestinal cancer-related death in the United States. Early detection and accurate diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancer are paramount in guiding treatment plans, as surgical resection can provide the only potential cure for this disease. The overall prognosis of pancreatic cancer is poor even in patients with resectable disease. The 5-year survival after surgical resection is ~10% in node-positive disease compared to ~30% in node-negative disease. The advancement of imaging studies and the multidisciplinary approach involving radiologists, gastroenterologists, advanced endoscopists, medical, radiation, and surgical oncologists have a major impact on the management of pancreatic cancer. Endoscopic ultrasonography is essential in the diagnosis by obtaining tissue (FNA or FNB) and in the loco-regional staging of the disease. The advancement in EUS techniques has made this modality a critical adjunct in the management process of pancreatic cancer. In this review article, we provide an overall description of the role of endoscopic ultrasonography in the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancer.

Direct Comparison of Elastography Endoscopic Ultrasound Fine-Needle Aspiration and B-Mode Endoscopic Ultrasound Fine-Needle Aspiration in Diagnosing Solid Pancreatic Lesions

Elastography endoscopic ultrasound (E-EUS) has been proved to be a valuable supplement to endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in differentiating solid pancreatic lesions, but the improvement of EUS-FNA guided during E-EUS has not been proven. Our study aimed to evaluate whether E-EUS fine-needle aspiration (E-EUS-FNA) was superior to B-mode EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses and whether the diagnostic rate was affected by specific factors. Our prospective study was conducted between 2019-2020 by recruiting patients with solid pancreatic masses. E-EUS examination was followed by one pass of E-EUS-FNA towards the blue part of the lesion and a second pass of EUS-FNA. The final diagnosis was based on surgery, E-EUS-FNA or EUS-FNA results, or a 12-month follow-up. Sixty patients with solid pancreatic lesions were evaluated. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for diagnosing malignancy using E-EUS-FNA and EUS-FNA were 89.5%, 100%, 90%, 93%, 100%, and 93.3%, respectively, but the differences were not significant. Neither mass location nor the lesion size influenced the results. The lengths of the core obtained during E-EUS-FNA and EUS-FNA were similar. E-EUS-FNA in solid pancreatic lesions was not superior to B-mode EUS-FNA.

The Role of Contrast-Enhanced Harmonic Endoscopic Ultrasound in Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound

Over the last decades, contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasound (CH-EUS) has emerged as an important diagnostic tool for the diagnosis and differentiation of several gastrointestinal diseases. The key advantage of CH-EUS is that the influx and washout of contrast in the target lesion can be observed in real time, accurately depicting microvasculature. CH-EUS is established as an evidence-based technique complementary to B-mode EUS to differentiate solid appearing structures, to characterize mass lesions, and to improve the staging of gastrointestinal and pancreatobiliary cancer. In the last few years, interest has increased in the use of CH-EUS in interventional procedures such as tissue acquisition, tumor ablation, biliary drainage, and the management of pancreatic fluid collections. The aim of this narrative review is to evaluate the available evidence and future expectations of CH-EUS in interventional EUS.