Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine-needle Biopsy With or Without Rapid On-site Evaluation for Diagnosis of Solid Pancreatic Lesions: A Randomized Controlled Non-Inferiority Trial

Adverse events of 20-22G second-generation endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy needles for solid lesions in the upper gastrointestinal tract and adjacent organs: Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Previous research has conducted meta-analyses on the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB). However, studies on adverse events (AEs) have been limited and sporadic and have included a highly diverse group of patients (with upper and lower gastrointestinal tract issues) and needles of varying sizes (19-22-25G). The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the incidence of AEs related to the utilization of 20-22G second-generation EUS-FNB needles subsequent to puncture of the upper gastrointestinal tract and adjacent organs.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, and SCIE databases from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2023. The primary outcome was percentage of summary AEs. Subgroup analyses were based on needle type, needle size, and lesion site.

RESULTS

A total of 99 studies were included in the analysis, with 9303 patients. The overall AE rate for 20-22G second generation EUS-FNB needles in upper gastrointestinal EUS-FNB was 1.8% (166/9303), with bleeding being the most common AE at 44.0%. The percentages of pancreatitis, abdominal pain, and other AEs were 24.1%, 21.1%, and 10.8%, respectively. Patients undergoing hepatic EUS-FNB had the highest incidence of AEs at 14.0%, followed by submucosal lesions at 3.2% and pancreatic lesions at 2.6%.

CONCLUSION

EUS-FNB is a safe procedure with a relatively low risk of upper gastrointestinal AEs (1.8%) and no associated deaths. Postoperative bleeding and pancreatitis are the most common complications of EUS-FNB. Most AEs are mild and self-limiting in severity, and serious complications are very rare.

Diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity of the rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) versus macroscopic on-site evaluation (MOSE) in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling: a systematic review

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is one of the safest minimally invasive modalities for tissue acquisition from submucosal lesions in and near the gastrointestinal tract. Rapid on-site cytologic evaluation (ROSE) is an attempt to improve the efficacy of EUS-FNA. It is a laboratory service that evaluates the cytomorphological features of FNA smears and biopsy touch imprints to offer real-time feedback and guidance during biopsy. The current systematic review compares the effectiveness of ROSE to macroscopic on-site evaluation (MOSE), focusing on cost, diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity, likelihood of adverse effects and procedure duration. The present systematic review is written following the regulations recommended by the Cochrane and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The databases searched were Cochrane CENTRAL, PubMed and Google Scholar. 16 studies met the inclusion criteria and were selected for this review. The findings established that ROSE aids in the improvement of diagnostic yield during FNA or biopsy procedures. However, it is time consuming, putting pressure on an institution’s resources. The systematic review also established that the ROSE significantly enhances the EUS-FNA procedure. The findings indicated that MOSE reduced procedure time, required fewer needle passes and could be easily accessed. MOSE+fine-needle biopsy demonstrated a shorter procedure time. MOSE is more effective than ROSE due to its accessibility, and fewer needle passes are needed to establish a diagnosis. However, the findings show that MOSE and ROSE display similar diagnostic yield, accuracy, sensitivity and specificity.

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.

High Diagnostic Yield of Fine Needle Biopsy for Pancreatic Serous Cystadenomas-A Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Distinguishing serous cystadenoma (SCA), a benign pancreatic cyst, from potentially malignant mucinous pancreatic cystic lesions carries significant clinical and prognostic implications. While endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration is the standard diagnostic tool, its low diagnostic yield often results in additional workup.

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluates diagnostic yield of fine needle biopsy (FNB) on lesions suggestive of serous cystadenoma on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with microcystic EUS appearance were identified database search from 2015 to 2022 and procedure information was obtained through a retrospective chart review from 2 large academic centers. Prior cross sectional imaging diagnosis was also obtained. All microcystic lesions with classic "honeycomb" appearance for SCA a on EUS were targeted for FNB and their pathology evaluated.

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients with suspected SCA who underwent EUS-FNB were included. EUS FNB was successful in obtaining diagnosis in 96.8% of patients. Serous cystadenoma was diagnosed via EUS FNB in 27 of 31 patients (87.1%). Of the remaining 4 patients, there was 1 invasive pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, 1 pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor, 1 intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm, and 1 nondiagnostic sample.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-FNB sampling for histopathology is a safe and accurate diagnostic tool for pancreatic SCA. When microcytic lesions are found on endoscopic ultrasound, our study results suggest that fine needle biopsy for histopathology should be considered as the initial diagnostic evaluation tool given the demonstrated improved diagnostic yield for SCA.

EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling of solid pancreatic masses with and without rapid onsite evaluation for commercial next-generation genomic profiling

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling (EUS-FNB) of solid pancreatic lesions with or without the use of rapid onsite evaluation (ROSE) provides a high diagnostic yield, the utility of ROSE for commercial genomic analysis is unclear.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective review was conducted of consecutive patients where genomic analysis was requested from EUS-FNB of solid pancreatic lesions, performed with 22-gauge fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles. Data were collected at 2 academic centers, one that routinely uses ROSE to assess adequacy for all EUS-FNB cases (University of California San Francisco, n = 44) and one that does not use ROSE (Washington University, n = 186).

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 230 patients (mean age, 67.3 ± 9.8 years; 52.6% women). There were no significant differences between patient and tumor characteristics or locations in the 2 groups. Adverse events were uncommon and similar between the groups (1.6% vs 0%). Adequacy for genomic evaluation was high and similar between those cases without and with ROSE (159/186 [85.5%] vs 39/44 [88.6%], P = .8). Genomic analysis resulted in potentially actionable mutations in a similar number of cases without and with ROSE (18.3% vs 15.9%, P = .82). However, compared with FNB sampling without ROSE, FNB sampling with ROSE required more than double the procedure time (mean, 21.1 ± 10 minutes vs 49.7 ± 20.6 minutes; P < .001) and a significantly higher number of median needle passes (3 [IQR, 2-3] vs 4 [IQR, 3-4], P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although EUS-FNB with ROSE did not have a significantly different adequacy for commercial genomic analysis compared with EUS-FNB without ROSE, it required significantly more procedure time and needle passes.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy needle can facilitate histological diagnosis of type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

The choice between 22-gauge endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) and EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for histological diagnosis of type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is unclear. We retrospectively examined the detection rate of histological findings for AIP using EUS-FNA/FNB.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with type 1 AIP using EUS-FNB (Franseen needle) or EUS-FNA (conventional needle) with 22-gauge needles at our hospital between 2012 and 2023 were included in this study. AIP was diagnosed according to International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria (ICDC). The detection rates of level 1 findings, which included storiform fibrosis and/or obliterative phlebitis, and level 2 histological findings were evaluated according to the ICDC.

RESULTS

The EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA groups included 25 and 24 patients, respectively. No significant differences in patient background were noted between the two groups. The detection rates of prominent filtration of lymphocytes and plasma cells along with fibrosis were 56.0% in the EUS-FNB group and 12.5% in the EUS-FNA group (p = .001). The detection rates of more than 10 IgG4-positive plasma cells per high-power microscopic field were 68.0% and 29.2% in the EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA groups, respectively (p = .007). The histological findings for levels 1 and 2 were significantly higher in the EUS-FNB group (56.0% vs. 12.5%; p = .001). Mild pancreatitis was observed in the EUS-FNB group; however, no other serious adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSION

The 22-gauge EUS-FNB yielded a higher rate of histological findings than 22-gauge EUS-FNA, suggesting that 22-gauge EUS-FNB is suitable and safe for the histological diagnosis of type 1 AIP.

Optimal tissue acquisition method for pancreatic mass

Pancreatic masses pose a diagnostic difficulty due to the technical complexities related to tissue acquisition. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition has transformed the field by allowing access to pancreatic lesions through fine-needle and biopsy. However, diagnostic accuracy differs based on tumor characteristics and procedural factors. This narrative review explores the nuances of tissue acquisition methods for pancreatic tumors, including factors such as tumor location, size, histological characteristics, and needle selection. It assesses the efficacy of different needle designs and maneuvers, including suction techniques and needle passes. Moreover, the diverse tissue preparation methods, including cytological smear, cell block, and direct histology, are discussed, highlighting the importance of tailored approaches based on tumor characteristics. Additionally, the roles of macroscopic on-site evaluation and rapid on-site evaluation in optimizing specimen adequacy are investigated. Furthermore, percutaneous ultrasound-guided biopsy is considered an alternative approach, particularly in settings where EUS is impractical. Additionally, the review emphasizes the emerging trend of using tissue for genetic testing and molecular analysis, requiring high-quality sample acquisition. Future directions in tissue acquisition techniques and their integration into clinical practice are discussed, providing promising avenues for pancreatic disease diagnosis and treatment.

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.

Diagnostic Endoscopic Ultrasound

The last two decades have seen the emergence of endoscopic technologies and techniques allowing for minimally invasive modalities for assessing and sampling lesions inside and outside of the gastrointestinal lumen, including the chest, abdomen, and pelvis. Incorporating these new endoscopic approaches has revolutionized the diagnosis and staging of intraluminal and extraluminal lesions and enabled more accessible and safer tissue acquisition.

Impact of tumor type and size on macroscopic tissue core retrieval in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy for pancreatic malignancies

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is pivotal for diagnosing and sampling pancreatic tumor tissues. This study aimed to assess how the histological type and size of tumors influence the adequacy of macroscopic tissue cores acquired using EUS-guided fine needle biopsy (FNB). We conducted a retrospective study involving 180 patients with pathologically confirmed pancreatic malignancies at our hospital, a medical center, between July 2020 and June 2023. Personal and clinical data, EUS findings, and pathological results were extracted from the patient records. The macroscopic tissue core acquisition rate was 86.1%. Patients with tumors larger than 3 cm had a higher sufficiency rate (93.3%) compared to those with tumors 3 cm or smaller (78.9%, p = 0.005). It was more difficult to obtain sufficient tissue cores from neuroendocrine tumors than from adenocarcinomas (67.7% vs. 89.9%, p = 0.001). Interestingly, obtaining a sufficient tissue core only affected the diagnostic rate of adenocarcinoma (93.3% vs. 60%, p < 0.001) but did not significantly influence the diagnostic rate of neuroendocrine tumors. This study highlights that small tumors (< 3 cm) and neuroendocrine tumors pose a challenge in obtaining sufficient tissue cores. However, obtaining sufficient tissue cores significantly influences the pathological diagnosis of FNB in adenocarcinoma but not in neuroendocrine tumors.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on the role of endoscopy in the diagnosis and management of solid pancreatic masses: summary and recommendations

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) provides an evidence-based approach for the role of endoscopy in the diagnosis and management of pancreatic masses. This document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and addresses needle selection (fine-needle biopsy [FNB] needle vs FNA needle), needle caliber (22-gauge vs 25-gauge needles), FNB needle type (novel or contemporary [fork-tip and Franseen] vs alternative FNB needle designs), and sample processing (rapid on-site evaluation [ROSE] vs no ROSE). In addition, this guideline addresses stent selection (self-expandable metal stents [SEMS] vs plastic stents), SEMS type (covered [cSEMS] vs uncovered [uSEMS]), and pain management (celiac plexus neurolysis [CPN] vs medical analgesic therapy). In patients with solid pancreatic masses undergoing EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA), the ASGE recommends FNB needles over FNA needles. With regard to needle caliber, the ASGE suggests 22-gauge over 25-gauge needles. When an FNB needle is used, the ASGE recommends using either a fork-tip or a Franseen needle over alternative FNB needle designs. After a sample has been obtained, the ASGE suggests against the routine use of ROSE in patients undergoing an initial EUS-TA of a solid pancreatic mass. In patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction undergoing drainage with ERCP, the ASGE suggests using SEMS over plastic stents. In patients with proven malignancy undergoing SEMS placement, the ASGE suggests using cSEMS over uSEMS. If malignancy has not been histopathologically confirmed, the ASGE recommends against the use of uSEMS. Finally, in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer and abdominal pain, the ASGE suggests the use of CPN as an adjunct for the treatment of abdominal pain. This document outlines the process, analyses, and decision approaches used to reach the final recommendations and represents the official ASGE recommendations on the above topics.

Effect of the number of passes on diagnostic performance of EUS fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic masses: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The optimal number of passes to maximize the diagnostic ability of EUS fine-needle biopsy (FNB) of solid pancreatic masses (SPMs) is not well known. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the impact of the incremental number of passes on diagnostic accuracy, tissue adequacy, and diagnostic yield for EUS-FNB of SPMs.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Central for randomized controlled trials comparing per-pass diagnostic outcomes of FNB needles in patients with SPMs. Meta-analysis was conducted using random-effects models. A separate analysis was performed on studies that used contemporary Franseen and fork-tip needles.

RESULTS

Overall, 19 randomized controlled trials (N = 3552) were identified. For EUS-FNB of SPMs, 3 passes with any FNB needle outperformed 2 passes for accuracy (odds ratio [OR], 1.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-2.09; I2 = 0%), adequacy (OR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.30-2.83; I2 = 61%), and yield (OR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.37-3.27; I2 = 14%). Adding a fourth or fifth pass resulted in no significant improvement in diagnostic parameters. When using contemporary FNB needles, adding a second to a single pass significantly improved accuracy (OR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.23-2.63; I2 = 0%), adequacy (OR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.65-2.90; I2 = 0%), and yield (OR, 2.72; 95% CI, 1.50-4.95; I2 = 0%). Adding a third pass to a second pass with contemporary needles improved adequacy (OR, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.97-4.46; I2 = 0%) but did not provide better diagnostic accuracy or yield.

CONCLUSIONS

Two passes with Franseen or fork-tip needles and 3 passes with any FNB needle suffice to provide optimal diagnostic performance for EUS-FNB of SPMs, without additional diagnostic benefits with more passes. Our results can inform future guidelines and quality benchmarks.

Impact of biliary-pancreatic double stents on EUS-guided tissue acquisition among patients with solid pancreatic lesions: A multicenter study

Background and Objective

Although the impact of biliary stents on the accuracy of EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) is still controversial, the influence of biliary-pancreatic double stents on EUS-TA is even more inconclusive. The aim of the study was to determine whether the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions will be affected after placement of biliary-pancreatic double stents.

Methods

A multicenter retrospective study including patients who underwent EUS-FNA with biliary duct obstruction was performed. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to whether there were biliary-pancreatic double stents before EUS-FNA. The patients' EUS-FNA report, histopathological results, and clinical case data were reviewed and compared.

Results

Ninety-two patients were included, 42 with biliary-pancreatic double stents and 50 without any stents. The puncture time taken by EUS-FNA was significantly longer in the stent group than the no-stent group (19 vs. 15 min, P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed in accuracy (90.5% vs. 94%), sensitivity (89.5% vs. 93.6%), specificity (100% vs. 100%), NPV (50% vs. 50%), PPV (100% vs. 100%), respectively, in both groups. Patients with larger lesions (OR = 1.600, 95% CI: 1.124-2.277) and those who required more passes had a higher diagnostic yield (OR = 9.376, 95% CI: 1.356-64.819) by multivariate analysis.

Conclusions

ERCP before EUS-FNA is feasible for the treatment of solid pancreatic lesions causing obstructive jaundice. It will not have a negative impact on the diagnostic accuracy and surgical complications, but the EUS-FNA operation time will be prolonged.

Guidelines for permanent iodine-125 seed interstitial brachytherapy for pancreatic cancer (2023 edition): The Chinese expert consensus workshop report

ABSTRACT

The incidence of pancreatic cancer is increasing worldwide. Approximately, 60% of patients with pancreatic cancer have distant metastases at the time of diagnosis, of which only 10% can be removed using standard resection. Further, patients derive limited benefits from chemotherapy or radiotherapy. As such, alternative methods to achieve local control have emerged, including permanent iodine-125 seed interstitial brachytherapy. In 2023, the Chinese College of Interventionalists, affiliated with the Chinese Medical Doctor Association, organized a group of multi-disciplinary experts to compose guidelines for this treatment modality. The aim of this conference was to standardize the procedure for permanent iodine-125 seed interstitial brachytherapy, including indications, contraindications, pre-procedural preparation, procedural operations, complications, efficacy evaluation, and follow-up.

Consensus statements on endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition. Guidelines from the Asian Endoscopic Ultrasound Group

OBJECTIVES

This consensus was developed by the Asian EUS Group (AEG), who aimed to formulate a set of practice guidelines addressing various aspects of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA).

METHODS

The AEG initiated the development of consensus statements and formed an expert panel comprising surgeons, gastroenterologists, and pathologists. Three online consensus meetings were conducted to consolidate the statements and votes. The statements were presented and discussed in the first two consensus meetings and revised according to comments. Final voting was conducted at a third consensus meeting. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was adopted to define the strength of the recommendations and quality of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 20 clinical questions and statements regarding EUS-TA were formulated. The committee recommended that fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles be preferred over conventional fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needles for EUS-TA of subepithelial lesions. For solid pancreatic masses, rapid on-site evaluation is not routinely recommended when FNB needles are used. For dedicated FNB needles, fork-tip and Franseen-tip needles have essentially equivalent performance.

CONCLUSION

This consensus provides guidance for EUS-TA, thereby enhancing the quality of EUS-TA.

Doing more with less: integrating small biopsies in cytology practice

Cytopathologists are at the forefront of specimen acquisition during many different procedures while providing rapid on site evaluation (ROSE). This has added pressure to cytopathologists as more and more ancillary testing is being requested on smaller amounts of tissue. By focusing on the most common organ sites: lung, head and neck, and pancreas, there is a discussion of what the cytopathologist needs to know to triage tissue successfully. Finally, there is a discussion of the logistical aspects of integrating small biopsies into everyday practice.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Sampling for the Cytohistological Diagnosis of Focal Liver Lesions

BACKGROUND

Focal liver lesions (FLL) often require cytohistological evaluation. Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) is highly accurate in diagnosing pancreatic and gastrointestinal malignancies. The aim of our study was to evaluate the role of EUS-TA in the characterization of FLL.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospective database of patients who underwent EUS-TA for the evaluation of FLL. Diagnostic yield, adverse events and factors associated with diagnostic yield were evaluated as endpoints. The effect of variables such as needle size, lesion size, rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) and the use of cytological or histological needles were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 114 cases were included (mean age 68.05 ± 11.35 years, 64 male). A correct diagnosis was made using EUS-TA in 100 of the 114 cases (diagnostic yield of 88%). The EUS-TA of additional extrahepatic lesions during the same EUS procedure increased the diagnostic yield to 94%. No adverse events were reported. Multivariate analysis did not identify any factor influencing the diagnostic yield.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-TA is a highly accurate and safe technique for the differential diagnosis of FLL and could be considered as the primary approach in this setting.

Comparative Assessment of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biopsies vs. Percutaneous Biopsies of Pancreatic Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Performance

Introduction: Pancreatic cancer ranks as the fourth deadliest form of cancer. However, it is essential to note that not all pancreatic masses signal primary malignancy. Therefore, it is imperative to establish the correct differential diagnosis, a process further supported by pre-operative biopsy procedures. This meta-analysis aims to compare the diagnostic performance of two minimally invasive biopsy approaches for pancreatic tissue sampling: percutaneous biopsies guided by computed tomography or ultrasound, and transduodenal biopsies guided by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in the MEDLINE and Scopus databases. The included studies analyzed the diagnostic performance of the two biopsy methods, and they were assessed for risk of bias using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. Statistical analysis was carried out using the RevMan and MetaDisc software packages. Results: The statistical analysis of the results demonstrated the superiority of the percutaneous approach. Specifically, the pooled sensitivity, specificity, LR+, LR-and DOR for the percutaneous approach were 0.896 [95% CI: 0.878-0.913], 0.949 [95% CI: 0.892-0.981], 9.70 [95% CI: 5.20-18.09], 0.20 [95% CI: 0.12-0.32] and 68.55 [95% CI: 32.63-143.98], respectively. The corresponding values for EUS-guided biopsies were 0.806 [95% CI: 0.775-0.834], 0.955 [95% CI: 0.926-0.974], 12.04 [95% CI: 2.67-54.17], 0.24 [95% CI: 0.15-0.39] and 52.56 [95% CI: 13.81-200.09], respectively. Nevertheless, it appears that this statistical superiority is also linked to the selection bias favoring larger and hence more readily accessible tumors during percutaneous biopsy procedures. Conclusions: Concisely, our meta-analysis indicates the statistical superiority of the percutaneous approach. However, selecting the optimal biopsy method is complex, influenced by factors like patient and tumor characteristics, clinical resources, and other relevant considerations.

Oil blotting paper for formalin fixation increases endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition-collected sample volumes on glass slides

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) is used for pathological diagnosis and obtaining samples for molecular testing, facilitating the initiation of targeted therapies in patients with pancreatic cancer. However, samples obtained via EUS-TA are often insufficient, requiring more efforts to improve sampling adequacy for molecular testing. Therefore, this study investigated the use of oil blotting paper for formalin fixation of samples obtained via EUS-TA.

METHODS

This prospective study enrolled 42 patients who underwent EUS-TA for pancreatic cancer between September 2020 and February 2022 at the Osaka International Cancer Institute. After a portion of each sample obtained via EUS-TA was separated for routine histological evaluation, the residual samples were divided into filter paper and oil blotting paper groups for analysis. Accordingly, filter paper and oil blotting paper were used for the formalin fixation process. The total tissue, nuclear, and cytoplasm areas of each sample were quantitatively evaluated using virtual slides, and the specimen volume and histological diagnosis of each sample were evaluated by an expert pathologist.

RESULTS

All cases were cytologically diagnosed as adenocarcinoma. The area ratios of the total tissue, nuclear, and cytoplasmic portions were significantly larger in the oil blotting paper group than in the filter paper group. The frequency of cases with large amount of tumor cells was significantly higher in the oil blotting paper group (33.3%) than in the filter paper group (11.9%) (p = 0.035).

CONCLUSIONS

Oil blotting paper can increase the sample volume obtained via EUS-TA on glass slides and improve sampling adequacy for molecular testing.

Repeated endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions after previous nondiagnostic or inconclusive sampling

OBJECTIVES

Repeated endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition represents the standard practice for solid pancreatic lesions after previous nondiagnostic or inconclusive results. Since data are lacking, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of repeated EUS fine-needle biopsy (rEUS-FNB) in this setting. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy; sample adequacy, sensitivity, specificity, and safety were secondary outcomes.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing rEUS-FNB for solid pancreatic lesions at 23 Italian centers from 2019 to 2021 were retrieved. Pathology on the surgical specimen, malignant histology together with ≥6-month follow-up, and benign pathology together with ≥12-month follow-up were adopted as gold standards.

RESULTS

Among 462 patients, 56.5% were male, with a median age of 68 (59-75) years, malignancy prevalence 77.0%. Tumor size was 26 (20-35) mm. Second-generation FNB needles were used in 89.6% cases. Diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of rEUS-FNB were 89.2%, 91.4%, and 81.7%, respectively (19 false-negative and 12 false-positive results). On multivariate analysis, rEUS-FNB performed at high-volume centers (odds ratio [OR] 2.12; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-3.17; P = 0.03) and tumor size (OR 1.03; 95% CI 1.00-1.06; P = 0.05) were independently related to diagnostic accuracy. Sample adequacy was 94.2%. Use of second-generation FNB needles (OR 5.42; 95% CI 2.30-12.77; P < 0.001) and tumor size >23 mm (OR 3.04; 95% CI 1.31-7.06; P = 0.009) were independently related to sample adequacy.

CONCLUSION

Repeated EUS-FNB allowed optimal diagnostic performance after nondiagnostic or inconclusive results. Patients' referral to high-volume centers improved diagnostic accuracy. The use of second-generation FNB needles significantly improved sample adequacy over standard EUS-FNB needles.

Tissue processing of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration specimens from solid pancreatic lesions

Now that tissue cores can be obtained using fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles, the ways tissues are handled for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) are changing. Direct smear, touch smear of core tissues, and centrifugation have been used for cytological examinations, and liquid-based cytology (LBC), which allows immunostaining and genetic tests that use residual samples, is emerging as an alternative. We emphasize that liquid cytology (Cytospin™ cytology and LBC) is still important, because it enables the diagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) when cancerous cells are scarce in specimens. Cell blocks are being replaced by core tissues obtained via FNB needles. Recent reports indicate that rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) is not necessary when FNB needles are used, and macroscopic on-site evaluation is used to evaluate specimen adequacy. Macroscopic findings of specimens are helpful in the diagnostic workup and for clarifying specimen-handling methods. In addition to the red strings and white cores observed in PDAC, mixed red and white strings, gray tissues, and gelatinous tissues are observed. Gray (necrotic) tissues and gelatinous (mucus) tissues are more suitable than histology for cell block or cytological processing. Tumor cells in neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are numerous in red strings but cannot be observed macroscopically. ROSE might thus be necessary for lesions that may be NETs. Core tissues can be used for genetic tests, such as those used for KRAS mutations and comprehensive genomic profiling. Cytological materials, including slides and LBC specimens, can also be genetic test materials.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is the first-choice procedure for obtaining pathological tissue samples from gastrointestinal (GI) subepithelial lesions (SELs). However, its diagnostic accuracy is lower than that for pancreatic masses owing to puncture difficulty and the need for immunostaining for definitive diagnosis. The advent of fine-needle biopsy needles, which have become well known in recent years, improves the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA for GI SELs. The forward-viewing echoendoscope and rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) have also helped to improve diagnostic accuracy. Furthermore, in facilities where ROSE is not available, endosonographers perform a macroscopic on-site evaluation. With these procedural innovations, EUS-FNA is now performed aggressively even for SELs smaller than 20 mm. The incidence of procedure-related adverse events such as bleeding and infection is low, and thus, EUS-FNA can be safely performed to diagnose SELs.

Advances and efficacy in specimen handling for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration and biopsy: A comprehensive review

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration and biopsy have significantly evolved since they offer a minimally invasive approach for obtaining pathological specimens from lesions adjacent to or within the intestine. This paper reviews advancements in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration and biopsy techniques and devices, emphasizing the importance of handling specimens for diagnostic accuracy. Innovations of fine needle biopsy needles with features like side holes and Franseen shapes have enhanced histological sampling capabilities. Techniques for specimen handling, including rapid on-site evaluation and macroscopic on-site evaluation, play pivotal roles in assessing sample adequacy, thereby influencing diagnostic outcomes. The utility of artificial intelligence in augmenting rapid on-site evaluation and macroscopic on-site evaluation, although still in experimental stages, presents a promising avenue for improving procedural efficiency and diagnostic precision. The choice of specimen handling technique is dependent on various factors including endoscopist preference, procedure objectives, and available resources, underscoring the need for a comprehensive understanding of each method's characteristics to optimize diagnostic efficacy and procedural safety.

Establishing the optimal number of passes during EUS-FNB for diagnosis of pancreatic solid lesions: Prospective multicenter study

Background and study aims The optimal number of needle passes during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) is not yet established. We aimed to perform a per-pass analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB of solid pancreatic lesions using a 22G Franseen needle. Patients and methods Consecutive patients with solid pancreatic lesions referred to 11 Italian centers were prospectively enrolled. Three needle passes were performed; specimens were collected after each pass and processed individually as standard histology following macroscopic on-site evaluation (MOSE) by the endoscopist. The primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy of each sequential pass. Final diagnosis was established based on surgical pathology or a clinical course of at least 6 months. Secondary endpoints were specimen adequacy, MOSE reliability, factors impacting diagnostic accuracy, and procedure-related adverse events. Results A total of 504 samples from 168 patients were evaluated. Diagnostic accuracy was 90.5% (85.0%-94.1%) after one pass and 97.6% (94.1%-99.3%) after two passes ( P =0.01). Similarly, diagnostic sensitivity and sample adequacy were significantly higher adding the second needle pass (90.2%, 84.6%-94.3% vs 97.5%, 93.8%-99.3%, P =0.009 and 91.1%, 85.7%-94.9% vs 98.2%, 95.8%-99.3%, P =0.009, one pass vs two passes, respectively). Accuracy, sensitivity, and adequacy remained the same after the third pass. The concordance between MOSE and histological evaluation was 89.9%. The number of passes was the only factor associated with accuracy. One case of mild acute pancreatitis (0.6%) was managed conservatively. Conclusions At least two passes should be performed for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions. MOSE is a reliable tool to predict the histological adequacy of specimens.

Feasibility of comprehensive genomic profiling using endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition with a 22-gauge Franseen needle

Aim

Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) test for solid tumors is now increasingly utilized in clinical practice, especially in pancreatobiliary cancer, and specimens obtained by endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) are often submitted for tissue-based CGP test. In this study, we evaluated the feasibility of EUS-TA using a 22-gauge Franseen needle for the CGP test.

Methods

Consecutive patients with solid tumors who underwent EUS-TA using a 22-gauge Franseen needle, and whose tissue samples were pre-checked for suitability for CGP test, were included in this single-center, retrospective analysis. The success rates of appropriate sample collection for CGP evaluated by pathologists (1st quality control) and CGP test (2nd quality control) were evaluated. In addition, The EUS-TA slides were evaluated for the tissue area and tumor area content, using the image software.

Results

A total of 50 cases, with 78% of pancreatic cancer, were included in the analysis. A median of 3 passes of EUS-TA were performed with an adverse event rate of 4%. The success rates for 1st and 2nd quality control for CGP tests were 86% and 76%, respectively. The image analyses suggested EUS-TA specimen did not always fulfill CGP test criteria, with 18% of tissue area ≥16 mm2 and 38% of tumor area content ≥20%, even in cases with successful CGP tests. The suction method yielded a significantly larger amount of DNA but without a significant difference in the multivariate analysis.

Conclusions

The present study demonstrated the feasibility of EUS-TA using a 22-gauge Franseen needle for CGP test.

Efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition using stereo-microscopic on-site evaluation for possible comprehensive genome profile in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Stereomicroscopic on-site evaluation (SOSE) is a rapid evaluation method for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) with a high diagnostic sensitivity when the stereomicroscopically visible white core (SVWC) cut-off value (≥ 11 mm) is met. We prospectively examined the association between SVWCs and the adequacy of tissue specimens, assuming subsequent comprehensive genome profiling (CGP).

METHODS

This study included 66 consecutive patients with suspected unresectable pancreatic cancer who underwent EUS-TA. The primary endpoint was the frequency of combined samples with ≥ 20% tumor cell content that met over twice the SVWC (T-SVWC) cut-off value, achieved through multiple punctures. The secondary endpoints were the number of punctures, the percentage of SVWC cut-off values, adverse events, the positive diagnosis rate, and the tissue section area.

RESULTS

The median number of EUS-TA punctures for suspected unresectable pancreatic cancer was 3 (range, 3-4); SVWC and T-SVWC cut-off values were obtained in 171/206 specimens and 65/66 patients, respectively. There were no EUS-TA-related adverse events. The positive diagnosis rate of EUS-TA was 95.5%. Among the 63 patients meeting the T-SVWC cut-off value in pathological diagnoses, the median tumor cell content was 40% (range, 5-80%), with 57 patients having tumor cell content ≥ 20%. The median tissue section area was 15 (range, 3-40) mm2.

CONCLUSIONS

When performing EUS-TA for unresectable pancreatic cancer with the intention of subsequent CGP, obtaining a high tumor cell content (≥ 20%) by assessing the T-SVWC cut-off value via SOSE may serve as a novel indicator for on-site estimation of CGP suitability for EUS-TA specimens.

Methods to increase the diagnostic efficiency of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for solid pancreatic lesions: An updated review

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is a means to procure adequate specimens for histological and cytologic analysis. The ideal EUS-FNA should be safe, accurate, and have a high sample adequacy rate and low adverse events rate. In recent years, many guidelines and trials on EUS-FNA have been published. The purpose of this article is to provide an update on the influence of some of the main factors on the diagnostic efficiency of EUS-FNA as well as a rare but serious complication known as needle tract seeding.

Clinical significance of tumor suppressor genes methylation in circulating tumor DNA of patients with pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) has emerged as a potential diagnostic and prognostic biomarker in various tumors. However, the role of tumor suppressor genes (TSGs) methylation in ctDNA of patients with pancreatic cancer (PC) remains largely unclear.

METHODS

Patients with PC (n = 43), pancreatic benign diseases (n = 39), and healthy controls (n = 20) were enrolled in the study. Quantitative analysis of methylation pattern of five candidate TSGs including NPTX2, RASSF1A, EYA2, p16, and ppENK in ctDNA was performed by next generation sequencing (NGS). The diagnostic performances of these 5-TSGs methylation were assessed by the operating characteristic (ROC) curve and clinicopathological features correlation analysis. Meanwhile, the changes in methylation levels of these 5-TSGs on the 7th postoperative day were evaluated in 23 PC patients who underwent radical resection.

RESULTS

The methylation levels of RASSF1A, EYA2, ppENK and p16 genes in patients with PC were significantly higher than those in healthy controls. EYA2, p16 and ppENK genes showed significantly hypermethylation in PC than those in pancreatic benign diseases. NPTX2, RASSF1A, EYA2, p16 and ppENK genes showed significantly hypermethylation in pancreatic benign diseases than those in healthy controls (P < 0.05). The methylation levels of these 5 candidate TSGs were not correlated with the tumor size, nerve invasion, lymph node metastasis and TNM stage of PC. The AUC of these biomarkers for diagnosis of PC ranged from 0.65 to 0.96. The AUC values of these methylated genes and CpG sites for differentiating malignant and benign pancreatic diseases were ranging from 0.68 to 0.92. Combined the hypermethylated genes improved the detective ability of PC than single gene. The methylation levels of NPTX2, EYA2 and ppENK genes were significantly decreased after radical resection of PC.

CONCLUSION

Quantitative analysis of methylation pattern of NPTX2, RASSF1A, EYA2, p16 and ppENK in ctDNA by NGS could be a valuable non-invasive tool for detection and monitoring of PC.

Echoendoscopic ultrasound pancreatic adenocarcinoma diagnosis and theranostic approach: should KRAS mutation research be recommended in everyday practice?

Background

The impact of KRAS mutation testing on pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) samples by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for reducing the need to repeat EUS-FNA has been demonstrated. Such testing however is not part of standard practice for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB).

Objectives

We aim to analyse the proportion of non-contributive samples by EUS-FNB and to evaluate the impact of KRAS mutation testing on the diagnosis, theranostics and survival.

Design

In this retrospective study, the impact on diagnosis and survival of KRAS testing for contributive and non-contributive samples by EUS-FNB was analysed.

Methods

The EUS-FNB samples, combined with KRAS testing using the Idylla® technique on liquid-based cytology from patients with PDAC between February 2019 and May 2023, were retrospectively reviewed. The cytology results were classified according to the guidelines of the World Health Organization System for Reporting Pancreaticobiliary Cytopathology (WHOSRPC).

Results

A total of 85 EUS-FNB specimens were reviewed. In all, 25 EUS-FNB samples did not lead to a formal diagnosis of PDAC according to the WHOSRPC (30.2%). Out of these 25, 11 (44%) could have been considered positive for a PDAC diagnosis thanks to the KRAS mutation test without carrying out further diagnosis procedures. The sensitivity of KRAS mutation testing using the Idylla technique was 98.6%. According to the available data, survival rates were not statistically different depending on the type of mutation.

Conclusion

KRAS mutation testing on liquid-based cytology using the Idylla or equivalent technique, combined with the PDAC EUS-FNB sample, should become a standard for diagnosis to avoid delaying treatment by doing another biopsy. Furthermore, knowledge of the KRAS status from treatment initiation could be used to isolate mutations requiring targeted treatments or inclusion in clinical research trials, especially for wild-type KRAS PDAC.

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.

Small biopsies for pancreatic lesions: Is there still room for fine needle aspiration?

Pancreatic carcinoma is an aggressive tumour with increasing incidence in both sexes worldwide. Early detection is, therefore, essential for patient management. A recent advancement involves the utilization of larger, thicker gauge needles, which enable the collection of core-type biopsies (FNB). Here, we investigated the role of fine needle aspiration and cytopathology in the diagnostic workflow of pancreatic lesions. A search query was designed to search for articles in the PubMed database comparing FNA and FNB for biopsy of pancreatic lesions, and detailed data were extracted from selected studies. Statistical analyses were performed using the R package meta version 6.2. Twenty-one studies made the final cut for data extraction. Overall, median age was 64.3 years (±6.1; 47.6-71.5), male: female proportion 53.9 (±11.3; 27.6-67.4), lesion size 3.1 cm (±0.5; 1.9-4.2 cm) and percentage of malignant cases 78.3% (±26.8; 2.1-100). FNA and FNB diagnostic yield was 85.8% (±10.3; 70.0-100.0) and 89.2% (±7.7; 70.0-98.6), respectively. Average accuracy was 89.5% (±11.7; 63.0-100.0) for FNA and 90.8% (±7.1; 77.0-100.0) for FNB. Adverse effects rate was 1.0% (±1.3; 0-4.3) for FNA and 2.2% (±4.4; 0-16.1) for FNB. None of the selected variables had a significant statistical difference between both methods. FNA and FNB perform similarly for diagnostic material acquisition in pancreatic lesions. The best outcome comes from the association of both techniques, emphasizing the value of combining cytological and histological morphology for the most accurate analysis.

Comparative diagnostic yield of different endoscopic techniques for tissue sampling of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence on the comparative diagnostic performance of endoscopic tissue sampling techniques for subepithelial lesions. We performed a systematic review with network meta-analysis to compare these techniques.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the sample adequacy and diagnostic accuracy of bite-on-bite biopsy, mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB), endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), and EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (FNB). Results were expressed as relative risk (RR) and 95%CI.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs were identified. EUS-FNB was significantly superior to EUS-FNA in terms of sample adequacy (RR 1.20 [95%CI 1.05-1.45]), whereas none of the other techniques significantly outperformed EUS-FNA. Additionally, bite-on-bite biopsy was significantly inferior to EUS-FNB (RR 0.55 [95%CI 0.33-0.98]). Overall, EUS-FNB appeared to be the best technique (surface under cumulative ranking [SUCRA] score 0.90) followed by MIAB (SUCRA 0.83), whereas bite-on-bite biopsy showed the poorest performance. When considering lesions <20 mm, MIAB, but not EUS-FNB, showed significantly higher accuracy rates compared with EUS-FNA (RR 1.68 [95%CI 1.02-2.88]). Overall, MIAB ranked as the best intervention for lesions <20 mm (SUCRA score 0.86 for adequacy and 0.91 for accuracy), with EUS-FNB only slightly superior to EUS-FNA. When rapid on-site cytological evaluation (ROSE) was available, no difference between EUS-FNB, EUS-FNA, and MIAB was observed.

CONCLUSION

EUS-FNB and MIAB appeared to provide better performance, whereas bite-on-bite sampling was significantly inferior to the other techniques. MIAB seemed to be the best option for smaller lesions, whereas EUS-FNA remained competitive when ROSE was available.

Endoscopic Diagnosis of Extra-Luminal Cancers

The last 2 decades have seen an emergence of endoscopic technologies and techniques allowing for minimally invasive modalities for assessing and sampling lesions outside of the gastrointestinal lumen, including the chest, abdomen, and pelvis. Incorporating these new endoscopic approaches has revolutionized the diagnosis and staging of extra-luminal malignancies and has enabled more accessible and safer tissue acquisition.

Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Diagnosis of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the most common (90%) type of solid pancreatic neoplasm. Due to its late presentation and poor survival rate, early diagnosis and timely treatment is of utmost importance for better clinical outcomes. Endoscopic ultrasound provides high-resolution images of the pancreas and has excellent sensitivity in the diagnosis of even small (<2 cm) pancreatic lesions. Apart from imaging, it also has an advantage of tissue acquisition (EUS fine-needle aspiration, FNA; or fine-needle biopsy, FNB) for definitive diagnoses. EUS-guided tissue acquisition plays a crucial role in genomic and molecular studies, which in today's era of personalized medicine, are likely to become important components of PDAC management. With the use of better needle designs and technical advancements, EUS has now become an indispensable tool in the management of PDAC. Lastly, artificial intelligence for the detection of pancreatic lesions and newer automated needles for tissue acquisition will obviate observer dependency in the near future, resulting in the wider dissemination and adoption of this technology for improved outcomes in patients with PDAC.

Dry suction versus wet suction technique of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy for diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: study protocol of a multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Studies have shown that the wet suction technique in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) generates better histological diagnostic accuracy and specimen quality than the dry suction technique. However, conclusions of wet suction on the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) are still controversial. Besides, the optimal number of passes for EUS-FNB has not been determined. We aimed to design a large multicenter randomized trial to compare the diagnostic accuracy of dry suction versus wet suction technique in solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs) using 22G Franseen needles and determine the optimal number of passes required for EUS-FNB.

METHODS

This is a multi-center open-label, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial with two parallel groups. Two hundred patients with SPLs will undergo EUS-FNB using 22G Franseen needles in 4 tertiary hospitals in China and will be randomly assigned to the dry suction group and wet suction group in a ratio of 1:1. The primary endpoint is diagnostic accuracy. Secondary endpoints include the optimal number of needle passes, sensitivity, specificity, specimen quality, cytological diagnoses, time of the procedure, and incidence of complications.

DISCUSSION

This study has been designed to determine (i) whether EUS-FNB using 22G Franseen needle with dry suction is non-inferior to wet suction in terms of diagnostic accuracy and (ii) the optimal number of passes during EUS-FNB of SPLs using 22G Franseen needle.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05549856. Registered on September 22, 2022.

Macroscopic qualitative evaluation of solid pancreatic lesion specimens from endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration/biopsies

OBJECTIVES

To pathologically clarify the macroscopic features of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration/biopsy (EUS-FNA/B) specimens in representative pancreatic diseases and establish tissue-handling standards based on the macroscopic findings.

METHODS

We gathered EUS-FNA/B specimens of cases at our institution with the final diagnoses of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC, n = 172), neuroendocrine tumor (NET, n = 19), and chronic inflammatory lesion (CIL, n = 24) including autoimmune pancreatitis. We classified the specimens' macroscopic features in five categories (red strings, mixed-red-and-white strings, white cores, gray tissues, gelatinous tissues) and compared the specimens' features on cytological and histological slides.

RESULTS

All five macroscopic categories were observed in variable combinations in the PDACs; red strings and white cores predominated in the NETs and CILs. White cores represented neoplastic (PDAC, NET) or lesion (CIL) tissues. Mixed-red-and-white strings were unique to PDACs and contained cancerous cells. Neoplastic cells were numerous in red strings in NETs but not the other groups. Gray and gelatinous tissues represented necrosis and mucin, respectively, and the former were almost exclusively observed in PDACs. Red strings, mixed-red-and-white strings, and white cores were suitable for histological examination, whereas gray and gelatinous tissues were suitable for cytological examination. The white cores, mixed-red-and-white strings, and gelatinous tissues may be composed of non-neoplastic tissues such as contaminated gastrointestinal epithelium. In seven PDACs, although white cores were obtained, a histological diagnosis was not established.

CONCLUSIONS

Macroscopic evaluations of EUS-FNA/B can enable the identification of specimen components and a possible diagnosis. They also contribute to the selection of the optimal tissue-handling methods.

Telecytology rapid onsite evaluation, with real-time communication between cytopathologist, cytotechnologist, and proceduralist, offers better adequacy rates for lymph node, but not thyroid, fine-needle aspirations

INTRODUCTION

Rapid onsite evaluation (ROSE) decreases rates of inadequate fine-needle aspirations (FNAs). Telecytology allows pathologists to perform ROSE without being physically "on site", thereby saving cytopathologists' travel time and allowing them to perform ROSE for multiple institutions. Little research exists comparing telecytology to non-telecytology ROSE for FNA inadequacy rates.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using previously obtained quality metrics, we compared inadequacy rates for lymph node and thyroid FNAs with and without ROSE and with non-telecytology ROSE compared with telecytology ROSE. Use of ROSE was determined by the proceduralist. Type of ROSE was location-based, as only certain locations at our institution have telecytology capabilities. Chi-squared testing was used to compare proportions of populations and P value was set to 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 1168 lymph node and 1177 thyroid FNAs were included in our adequacy analysis. We found any ROSE decreased our inadequacy rate for both lymph node (20.4% to 12.7%, P = 0.002) and thyroid (34.7% to 4.8%, P = 7.4 × 10-18) FNAs. We found telecytology further decreased our inadequacy rate for lymph node (13.8% to 5.9%, P = 0.016), but not thyroid (3.3% to 5.0%, P = 0.34), FNAs.

CONCLUSIONS

At our institution, when using telecytology, slides are read in real time with the cytotechnologist and the proceduralist looking at slides together near the patient bedside, while the cytopathologist is on the phone looking at slides on the computer screen via Dameware. When non-telecytology ROSE is performed, the cytotechnologist evaluates a slide, brings it to the cytopathologist's office and then the cytopathologist calls the proceduralist to discuss the slide. We believe telecytology offers an opportunity for more inclusive communication thereby improving adequacy rates for more complex cases, like lymph nodes, without affecting adequacy rates for cases where assessment of adequacy is less complex, like thyroid. This research supports use of telecytology especially for complex cases.

Impact of Biopsy Attempts, Race, and Access on Time to Initiation of Treatment for Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

Biopsy of suspected pancreatic cancer (PDAC) in surgical candidates is informative however not always necessary. Biopsies impact treatment options as histological diagnosis are presently required for neo-adjuvant therapy, but not surgical resection. We explored the impact of pursuing tissue diagnosis by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) biopsy on time to treatment in patients with resectable and borderline resectable PDAC.

METHODS

A retrospective review of surgical patients with ultimately proven PDAC was performed (2011-2021). Milestone dates (cancer suspected, biopsy(ies), surgical or neo-adjuvant treatment) were collected. Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon tests, Pearson's chi-squared tests, Fisher's exact tests, linear regressions, and Cox proportional hazard models were used for data analysis.

RESULTS

Among 131 resectable and 58 borderline resectable patients, the borderline resectable group underwent more biopsies (1.2 vs 0.7, p < 0.0001), were more likely to undergo biopsy at tertiary care centers (67.2% vs 30.5%, p < 0.0001), and trended toward longer time to treatment (49 vs 44 days, p = 0.070). Significant increases in days to treatment were seen in patients with Black race (29 days, p = 0.0002) and Medicare insurance (22 days, p = 0.038) and no biopsies at a tertiary care center (10 days, p = 0.039). After adjusting for covariates, additional biopsies significantly delayed treatment (1 biopsy: 21 days, p = 0.0001; 2 biopsies: 44 days, p < 0.0001; 3 biopsies: 68 days, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS biopsy significantly impacts time between suspicion and treatment of PDAC. This may be exacerbated by clinical practices increasingly favoring neo-adjuvant therapy that necessitates biopsy-proven disease. Time to treatment may also be impacted by access to tertiary centers and racial disparities.

Clinical-radiomics nomogram using contrast-enhanced CT to predict histological grade and survival in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Objectives

Tumor grading is important for prognosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). In this study, we developed preoperative clinical-radiomics nomograms using features from contrast-enhanced CT (CECT), to discriminate high-grade and low-grade PDAC and predict overall survival (OS).

Methods

In this single-center, retrospective study conducted from February 2014 to April 2021, consecutive PDAC patients who underwent CECT and had pathologically identified grading were randomized to training (n=200) and test (n=84) cohorts for development of model to predict histological grade based on radiomics scores from CECT (HGrad). Another 42 patients were used as external validation cohort of HGrad. A nomogram (HGnom) was constructed using radiomics score, CA12-5 and smoking to predict histological grade. A second nomogram (Pnom) was constructed using radiomics score, CA12-5, TNM, adjuvant treatment, resection margin and microvascular invasion to predict OS in radical resection patients (217 of 284).

Results

Among 326 patients, 122 were high-grade (120 poorly differentiated and 2 undifferentiated). The HGrad yielded AUCs of 0.75 (95% CI: 0.64, 0.85) and 0.76 (95% CI: 0.60, 0.91) in test and validation cohorts. The HGnom achieved AUCs of 0.77 (95% CI: 0.66, 0.87), and the predicted grades calibrated well with actual grades (P=.13). OS was different between the grades predicted by radiomics scores (P=.01). The integrated AUC of the Pnom for predicting OS was 0.80 (95% CI: 0.75, 0.88).

Conclusion

Compared with the HGrad using features from CECT, the HGnom demonstrated higher performance for predicting histological grade. The Pnom helped identify patients with high survival outcome in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition with or without rapid on-site evaluation for solid pancreatic lesions: five years of experience from a single center

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition (TA) by EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) or fine needle biopsy (FNB) is a standard diagnostic procedure for solid pancreatic lesions. Whether rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) should be used to support EUS-TA remains controversial. Here we assessed the diagnostic performance of EUS-TA with or without self-ROSE for solid pancreatic masses.

METHODS

Three hundred and seventy EUS-TA cases with self-ROSE and 244 cases without ROSE were retrospectively enrolled between August 2018 and June 2022. All procedures including ROSE were performed by the attending endoscopist. Clinical data, EUS characteristics, and diagnostic performance for distinguishing benign from malignant solid pancreatic masses including accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Self-ROSE improved the diagnostic accuracy of solid pancreatic lesions by 16.7% in the EUS-TA group (p < 0.001) and by 18.9% in the EUS-FNA alone group (p < 0.001). Self-ROSE also improved the diagnostic sensitivity by 18.6% in the EUS-TA group (p < 0.001) and by 21.2% in the EUS-FNA alone group (p < 0.001). Improvements in the diagnostic accuracy by self-ROSE in the EUS-FNB group were not significant. 2.2 ± 0.7, 2.4 ± 0.9, 2.3 ± 0.7, 2.5 ± 0.9, 2.1 ± 0.6, and 2.1 ± 0.7 needle passes were required in the EUS-TA, EUS-FNA, and EUS-FNB with or without self-ROSE groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Self-ROSE significantly improved the accuracy and sensitivity of EUS-FNA alone and EUS-TA diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions and helped to reduce needle passes during the procedure. Whether self-ROSE benefits EUS-FNB and whether EUS-FNB alone is comparable to EUS-FNA with self-ROSE require further clarification.

Using Endoscopy in the Diagnosis of Pancreato-Biliary Cancers

Pancreatic cancer and cholangiocarcinoma are life threatening oncological conditions with poor prognosis and outcome. Pancreatic cystic lesions are considered precursors of pancreatic cancer as some of them have the potential to progress to malignancy. Therefore, accurate identification and classification of these lesions is important to prevent the development of invasive cancer. In the biliary tract, the accurate characterization of biliary strictures is essential for providing appropriate management and avoiding unnecessary surgery. Techniques have been developed to improve the diagnosis, risk stratification, and management of pancreato-biliary lesions. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and associated techniques, such as elastography, contrasted-enhanced EUS, and EUS-guided needle confocal laser endomicroscopy, may improve diagnostic accuracy. In addition, intraductal techniques applied during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), such as new generation cholangioscopy and in vivo cellular evaluation through probe-based confocal laser endomicroscopy, can increase the diagnostic yield in characterizing indeterminate biliary strictures. Both EUS-guided and intraductal approaches can provide the possibility for tissue sampling with new tools, such as needles, biopsies forceps, and brushes. At the molecular level, novel biomarkers have been explored that provide new insights into diagnosis, risk stratification, and management of these lesions.

Role of Therapeutic Endoscopic Ultrasound in Management of Pancreatic Cancer: An Endoscopic Oncologist Perspective

Pancreatic cancer is a highly lethal disease with an aggressive clinical course. Patients with pancreatic cancer are usually asymptomatic until significant progression of their disease. Additionally, there are no effective screening guidelines for pancreatic cancer in the general population. This leads to a delay in diagnosis and treatment, resulting in poor clinical outcomes and low survival rates. Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) is an indispensable tool for the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancer. In the modern era, with exponential advancements in technology and device innovation, EUS is also being increasingly used in a variety of therapeutic interventions. In the context of pancreatic cancer where therapies are limited due to the advanced stage of the disease at diagnosis, EUS-guided interventions offer new and innovative options. Moreover, due to their minimally invasive nature and ability to provide real-time images for tumor localization and therapy, they are associated with fewer complication rates compared to conventional open and laparoscopic approaches. In this article, we detail the most current and important therapeutic applications of EUS for pancreatic cancer, namely EUS-guided Fine Needle Injections, EUS-guided Radiotherapy, and EUS-guided Ablations. Furthermore, we also discuss the feasibility and safety profile of each intervention in patients with pancreatic cancer to provide gastrointestinal medical oncologists, radiation and surgical oncologists, and therapeutic endoscopists with valuable information to facilitate patient discussions and aid in the complex decision-making process.

Endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle biopsy to assess DAXX/ATRX expression and alternative lengthening of telomeres status in non-functional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Death domain-associated protein (DAXX) and/or α-thalassemia/mental retardation X-linked (ATRX) chromatin remodeling genes mutations and alternative lengthening of telomeres (ALT) activation are associated with more aggressive behavior of non-functional pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NF-PanNETs). We aimed to evaluate the reliability of such markers on endoscopic-ultrasound fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) specimens.

METHODS

Patients who underwent EUS-FNB and subsequent surgical resection for PanNETs between January 2017 and December 2019 were retrospectively identified. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) to evaluate DAXX/ATRX expression and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) for ALT status were performed. Primary outcome was the concordance rate of markers expression between EUS-FNB and surgical specimens. Secondary aims were association between markers and lesion aggressiveness, their diagnostic performance in predicting aggressiveness, and agreement of preoperative and post-surgical Ki67-based grading.

RESULTS

Forty-one NF-PanNETs (mean diameter 36.1 ± 26.5 mm) were included. Twenty-four showed features of lesion aggressiveness. Concordance of expressions of DAXX, ATRX, and ALT status between EUS-FNB and surgical specimens were 95.1% (κ = 0.828; p < 0.001), 92.7% (κ = 0.626; p < 0.001), and 100% (κ = 1; p < 0.001), respectively. DAXX/ATRX loss and ALT-positivity were significantly (p < 0.05) associated with metastatic lymphnodes and lymphovascular invasion. The combination of all tumor markers (DAXX/ATRX loss + ALT-positivity + grade 2) reached an accuracy of 73.2% (95%CI 57.1-85.8) in identifying aggressive lesions. Pre- and post-operative ki-67-based grading was concordant in 80.5% of cases (k = 0.573; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

DAXX/ATRX expression and ALT status can be accurately evaluated in a preoperative setting on EUS-FNB samples, potentially improving the identification of patients with increased risk and poorer prognosis.

Comparative diagnostic performance of different techniques for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Evidence is limited on the comparative diagnostic performance of tissue sampling techniques for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling of pancreatic masses. We performed a systematic review with network meta-analysis to compare these techniques.

METHODS

Rates of sample adequacy, blood contamination, and tissue integrity using fine-needle biopsy sampling needles were evaluated. Direct and indirect comparisons were performed among the slow-pull, dry-suction, modified wet-suction, or no-suction techniques. Results are expressed as risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Overall, 9 randomized controlled trials (756 patients) were identified. On network meta-analysis, the no-suction technique was significantly inferior to the other techniques (RR, .85 [95% CI, .78-.92] vs slow pull; RR, .85 [95% CI, .78-.92] vs dry suction; RR, .83 [95% CI, .76-.90] vs modified wet suction) in terms of sample adequacy. Consequently, modified wet suction was shown to be the best technique (surface under the cumulative ranking curve score, .90), with the no-suction technique showing poorer performance in terms of sample adequacy (surface under the cumulative ranking curve score, .14). Dry suction was associated with significantly higher rates of blood contamination as compared with the slow-pull technique (RR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.15-1.80), whereas no suction led to less blood contamination of samples in comparison with other techniques (RR, .71 [95% CI, .52-.97] vs slow pull; RR, .49 [95% CI, .36-.66] vs dry suction; RR, .57 [95% CI, .40-.81] vs modified wet suction). The modified wet-suction technique significantly outperformed dry suction in terms of tissue integrity of the sample (RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.06-1.75).

CONCLUSIONS

Modified wet suction seemed to provide high rates of integrity and adequate samples, albeit with high blood contamination. The no-suction technique performed significantly worse than other sampling strategies.

Recent Developments in the Field of Endoscopic Ultrasound for Diagnosis, Staging, and Treatment of Pancreatic Lesions

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) plays a crucial role in the diagnosis of both solid and cystic pancreatic lesions and in the staging of patients with pancreatic cancer through its use for tissue and fluid sampling. Additionally, in cases of precancerous lesions, EUS-guided therapy can also be provided. This review aims to describe the most recent developments regarding the role of EUS in the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic lesions. Moreover, complementary EUS imaging modalities, the role of artificial intelligence, new devices, and modalities for tissue acquisition, and techniques for EUS-guided treatment are discussed.

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.).

Comprehensive review on endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition techniques for solid pancreatic tumor

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is speculated to become the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality by 2030, a high mortality rate considering the number of cases. Surgery and chemotherapy are the main treatment options, but they are burdensome for patients. A clear histological diagnosis is needed to determine a treatment plan, and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition (TA) is a suitable technique that does not worsen the cancer-specific prognosis even for lesions at risk of needle tract seeding. With the development of personalized medicine and precision treatment, there has been an increasing demand to increase cell counts and collect specimens while preserving tissue structure, leading to the development of the fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle. EUS-FNB is rapidly replacing EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) as the procedure of choice for EUS-TA of pancreatic cancer. However, EUS-FNA is sometimes necessary where the FNB needle cannot penetrate small hard lesions, so it is important clinicians are familiar with both. Given these recent dev-elopments, we present an up-to-date review of the role of EUS-TA in pancreatic cancer. Particularly, technical aspects, such as needle caliber, negative pressure, and puncture methods, for obtaining an adequate specimen in EUS-TA are discussed.