Management of patients with pancreatic cystic lesions: A case-based survey

Clinical decisions in pancreatic cancer surgery: a national survey and case-vignette study

Very few surveys have been carried out of oncosurgical decisions made in patients with pancreatic cancer (PC), or of the possible differences in therapeutic approaches between low/medium and high-volume centers. A survey was sent out to centers affiliated to the Spanish Group of Pancreatic Surgery (GECP) asking about their usual pre-, intra- and post-operative management of PC patients and describing five imaginary cases of PC corresponding to common scenarios that surgeons regularly assess in oncosurgical meetings. A consensus was considered to have been reached when 80% of the answers coincided. We received 69 responses from the 72 GECP centers (response rate 96%). Pre-operative management: consensus was obtained on 7/16 questions (43.75%) with no significant differences between low- vs high-volume centers. Intra-operative: consensus was obtained on 11/28 questions (39.3%). D2 lymphadenectomy, biliary culture, intra-operative biliary margin study, pancreatojejunostomy, and two loops were significantly more frequent in high-volume hospitals (p < 0.05). Post-operative: consensus was obtained on 2/8 questions (25%). No significant differences were found between low-/medium- vs high-volume hospitals. Of the 41 questions asked regarding the cases, consensus was reached on 22 (53.7%). No differences in the responses were found according to the type of hospital. Management and cases: consensus was reached in 42/93 questions (45.2%). At GECP centers, consensus was obtained on 45% of the questions. Only 5% of the answers differed between low/medium and high-volume centers (all intra-operative). A more specific assessment of why high-volume centers obtain the best results would require the design of complex prospective studies able to measure the therapeutic decisions made and the effectiveness of their execution. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04755036.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided through-the-needle microforceps biopsy and needle-based confocal laser-endomicroscopy increase detection of potentially malignant pancreatic cystic lesions: A single-center study

BACKGROUND

Currently, there is insufficient data about the accuracy in the diagnosing of pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs), especially with novel endoscopic techniques such as with direct intracystic micro-forceps biopsy (mFB) and needle-based confocal laser-endomicroscopy (nCLE).

AIM

To compare the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and associated techniques for the detection of potentially malignant PCLs: EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), contrast-enhanced EUS (CE-EUS), EUS-guided fiberoptic probe cystoscopy (cystoscopy), mFB, and nCLE.

METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective study. We identified patients who had undergone EUS, with or without additional diagnostic techniques, and had been diagnosed with PCLs. We determined agreement among malignancy after 24-mo follow-up findings with detection of potentially malignant PCLs via the EUS-guided techniques and/or EUS-guided biopsy when available (EUS malignancy detection).

RESULTS

A total of 129 patients were included, with EUS performed alone in 47/129. In 82/129 patients, EUS procedures were performed with additional EUS-FNA (21/82), CE-EUS (20/82), cystoscopy (27/82), mFB (36/82), nCLE (44/82). Agreement between EUS malignancy detection and the 24-mo follow-up findings was higher when associated with additional diagnostic techniques than EUS alone [62/82 (75.6%) vs 8/47 (17%); OR 4.35, 95%CI: 2.70-7.37; P < 0.001]. The highest malignancy detection accuracy was reached when nCLE and direct intracystic mFB were both performed, with a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and observed agreement of 100%, 89.4%, 77.8%, 100% and 92.3%, respectively (P < 0.001 compared with EUS-alone).

CONCLUSION

The combined use of EUS-guided mFB and nCLE improves detection of potentially malignant PCLs compared with EUS-alone, EUS-FNA, CE-EUS or cystoscopy.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided through-the-needle microforceps biopsy and needle-based confocal laser-endomicroscopy increase detection of potentially malignant pancreatic cystic lesions: A single-center study

BACKGROUND

Currently, there is insufficient data about the accuracy in the diagnosing of pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs), especially with novel endoscopic techniques such as with direct intracystic micro-forceps biopsy (mFB) and needle-based confocal laser-endomicroscopy (nCLE).

AIM

To compare the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and associated techniques for the detection of potentially malignant PCLs: EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), contrast-enhanced EUS (CE-EUS), EUS-guided fiberoptic probe cystoscopy (cystoscopy), mFB, and nCLE.

METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective study. We identified patients who had undergone EUS, with or without additional diagnostic techniques, and had been diagnosed with PCLs. We determined agreement among malignancy after 24-mo follow-up findings with detection of potentially malignant PCLs via the EUS-guided techniques and/or EUS-guided biopsy when available (EUS malignancy detection).

RESULTS

A total of 129 patients were included, with EUS performed alone in 47/129. In 82/129 patients, EUS procedures were performed with additional EUS-FNA (21/82), CE-EUS (20/82), cystoscopy (27/82), mFB (36/82), nCLE (44/82). Agreement between EUS malignancy detection and the 24-mo follow-up findings was higher when associated with additional diagnostic techniques than EUS alone [62/82 (75.6%) vs 8/47 (17%); OR 4.35, 95%CI: 2.70-7.37; P < 0.001]. The highest malignancy detection accuracy was reached when nCLE and direct intracystic mFB were both performed, with a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and observed agreement of 100%, 89.4%, 77.8%, 100% and 92.3%, respectively (P < 0.001 compared with EUS-alone).

CONCLUSION

The combined use of EUS-guided mFB and nCLE improves detection of potentially malignant PCLs compared with EUS-alone, EUS-FNA, CE-EUS or cystoscopy.

A health economic evaluation of needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy for the diagnosis of pancreatic cysts

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

 The low sensitivity of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), especially for the diagnosis of serous cystadenomas (SCAs), can be associated with diagnostic uncertainty that can regularly lead to unnecessary surgical procedures. Needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (nCLE) used with EUS-FNA improves diagnostic accuracy, helping to reduce unnecessary surgery and patient follow-up. This study was conducted to evaluate the economic benefit of EUS-FNA + nCLE.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 Probabilities used were derived from two studies representative of the two diagnostic strategies: a retrospective analysis of patients diagnosed by EUS-FNA alone and a prospective study of patients diagnosed by EUS-FNA + nCLE. Costs were based on French healthcare system rates; both private and public sector rates were included. A decision tree structure model used these probabilities and costs for two hypothetical cohorts of 1000 patients.

RESULTS

 EUS-FNA + nCLE resulted in a reduction of 23 % in the total rate of surgical intervention, which translated to a reduction in clinical costs of 13 % (public sector) and 14 % (private sector). Additionally, the reduced rate of surgery would save the lives of 4 in 1000 patients. A stochastic sensitivity analysis using 100 simulations showed that in all cases the number of interventions was less for EUS-FNA + nCLE than for EUS-FNA. There was also a reduction in the incidence of false negatives using EUS-FNA + nCLE.

CONCLUSIONS

 EUS-FNA + nCLE results in significant economic benefits by reducing the incidence of misdiagnosis through improved diagnostic accuracy.