A comparison between 25-gauge and 22-gauge Franseen needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of pancreatic and peripancreatic masses: a randomized non-inferiority study

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.

Lymphadenopathy Tissue Sampling by EUS-Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy Contributes to Meeting the Conditions for Genomic Profiling

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) performed with a Franseen needle or Fork-tip needle enables greater tissue acquisition. However, it is unknown whether EUS-FNB could contribute to lymphadenopathy genomic profiling. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of EUS-FNB using a Franseen or Fork-tip needle for tissue acquisition and genomic profiling in patients with lymphadenopathy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with abdominal lymphadenopathy who underwent EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA)/EUS-FNB were included in this study. The amount of acquired tissue and its suitability for genomic profiling were compared between FNA and FNB. Specimen quality was evaluated by a widely used pathologic adequacy scoring system (0: insufficient; 1 to 2: cytologic; 3: limited histologic; 4 to 5: sufficient histologic). The criteria of FoundationOne CDx (F1CDx) and NCC Oncopanel (NOP) were used to assess the suitability for genomic profiling.

RESULTS

In total, 72 patients underwent EUS-FNA, and the other 20 patients underwent EUS-FNB. The pathologic adequacy score and suitability for genomic profiling based on the criteria were significantly higher for FNB than for FNA [histologic adequacy score: 5 (4 to 5) versus 3 (0 to 5), P <0.01; F1CDx: 16.7% vs. 0%, P =0.01; NOP: 66.7% vs. 7.5%, P <0.01]. In multivariate analysis, EUS-FNB was identified as the only factor that influenced the suitability for genomic profiling based on the above-mentioned criteria (odds ratio 19.5, 95% CI: 3.74-102, P <0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-FNB performed using Franseen or Fork-tip needles may result in greater lymphadenopathy tissue acquisition and thus enhanced suitability for genomic profiling compared with EUS-FNA.

Comparison of clinical/histological outcomes according to puncture sites in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy for large pancreatic masses: Multicenter randomized prospective pilot study

OBJECTIVES

There are no recommendations regarding the optimal puncture site in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB). This multicenter randomized prospective study compared the diagnostic accuracy and histological findings according to the sampling site for pancreatic masses larger than 3 cm.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with pancreatic masses larger than 3 cm indicated for EUS-FNB were included in the study. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups for the initial puncture site (central vs. peripheral sampling of the masses). A minimum of four passes were performed, alternating between the center and the periphery. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients were equally divided into the central group and the peripheral group. The final diagnosis revealed malignancy in 95 patients (pancreatic cancer [n = 89], neuroendocrine tumor [n = 4], lymphoma [n = 1], metastatic carcinoma [n = 1]), and benign conditions in five patients (chronic pancreatitis [n = 4], autoimmune pancreatitis [n = 1]). There was no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy between the puncture sites. However, combining samples from both areas resulted in higher diagnostic accuracy (97.0%) compared to either area alone, with corresponding values of 88.0% for the center (P = 0.02) and 85.0% for the periphery (P = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Both central sampling and peripheral sampling showed equivalent diagnostic accuracy in detecting malignancy. However, combining samples from both areas generated superior diagnostic yield compared to using either sampling site alone. For pancreatic masses larger than 3 cm, it is advisable to consider sampling from various areas of the masses to maximize the diagnostic yield.

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.

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.

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.

Comparison of Franseen and novel tricore needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy in a porcine liver model

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy is an effective method for obtaining tissue samples from various organs; however, challenges such as inadequate specimens persist. This study compared a newly designed Tricore needle with a Franseen needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy of porcine liver. Both needles were tested on four male Yorkshire pigs. Specimens were obtained with an 100% (36/36) success rate with no procedure-related adverse effects. The Tricore needle experienced significantly less resistance during puncture than Franseen needle (3.83 vs. 5.97 N, P < 0.001) and better ultrasound visibility (168.97 vs. 125.04, P = 0.004). The Tricore needle also achieved faster specimen acquisition time (48.94 vs. 59.90 s, P = 0.038), larger total specimen area (6.67 vs. 4.68 mm2, P = 0.049), fewer fragments (23.94 vs. 31.94, P = 0.190), lager fragment area (0.28 vs. 0.15 mm2, P < 0.001), and more the number of complete portal tracts (15.44 vs. 9.33, P = 0.017) compared to the Franseen needle. The newly designed Tricore needle showed enhanced procedural performance and specimen quantity and quality compared to commercially available Franseen needle. Although further clinical studies are required, the Tricore needle may represent a favorable option for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy procedures.

A 22-G or a 25-G Needle: Which One to Use in the Diagnostics of Solid Pancreatic Lesions? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

With the 12th highest incidence and a common late diagnostic at advanced stages, neoadjuvant therapies for pancreatic cancer are important, but they require a confirmed diagnosis. Being a diagnostic standard, the clarification of the clinical relevance of needle gauges is needed, as larger ones may retrieve more tissue for diagnostics, but may also increase the risk of complications. We performed a meta-analysis to compare the efficiency of the most commonly used 22-G and 25-G needles for EUS guided biopsy in solid pancreatic lesions. The MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, Cochrane (CENTRAL), and Scopus databases were searched with "EUS", "needle", "FNA", "pancreas", "prospective", "22G", and "25G" keywords. Mixed effects were assessed in the model, with a mean of 86% and a 95% confidence interval. Fourteen prospective studies that compared the efficiency of 22-G and 25-G biopsy needles in 508 and 524 lesions, respectively, were analyzed, along with 332 specimens biopsied using both needle sizes. The groups did not significantly differ in the outcomes. A low degree of heterogeneity was observed overall, except for specimen adequacy. Moreover, 22-G and 25-G needles have comparable safety and efficacy for focal pancreatic lesion biopsies without a high risk of complications.

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.

The factors that influence the diagnostic accuracy and sample adequacy of EUS-guided tissue acquisition for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions

Background and Objectives

EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) is the preferred method to acquire pancreatic cancer (PC) tissues. The factors associated with false-negative outcomes and inadequate samples should be explored to gain an understanding of EUS-TA.

Methods

The patients who underwent EUS-TA for suspected solid PC but whose results were false-negative were analyzed. The PC patients who underwent EUS-TA with true-positive results on the first day of every month during the study period were selected as the control group. The factors influencing diagnostic accuracy and sample adequacy were explored.

Results

From November 2017 to January 2022, 184 patients were included in the false-negative group, and 175 patients were included in the control group. Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that the recent acute pancreatitis [odds ratio (OR): 0.478, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.250-0.914, P = 0.026] and high echo component within the tumor (OR: 0.103, 95% CI: 0.027-0.400, P = 0.001) were independently associated with false-negative EUS-TA results. Meanwhile, using fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles (OR: 2.270, 95% CI: 1.277-4.035, P = 0.005), more needle passes (OR: 1.651,95% CI: 1.239-2.199, P = 0.005), large tumor size (OR: 1.053, 95% CI: 1.029-1.077, P < 0.001), and high CA-19-9 level (OR: 1.001, 95% CI: 1.000-1.001, P = 0.019) were independently associated with true-positive EUS-TA outcomes. Three needle passes are needed to achieve optimal EUS-TA outcomes. Tumor location in the body/tail (OR: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.01-1.72; P = 0.04), needle passes ≥3 (OR: 1.90; 95% CI: 1.22-2.56; P < 0.001), and using the FNB needle (OR: 2.10; 95%: 1.48-2.85; P < 0.001) were independently related to sample adequacy.

Conclusion

Numerous factors were identified to be associated with the diagnostic accuracy and sample adequacy of EUS-TA.

EUS-FNA versus EUS-FNB in Pancreatic Solid Lesions ≤ 15 mm

A small tumor size may impact the diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) for diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs). We aimed to compare the diagnostic yield of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and biopsy (FNB) in SPLs with a diameter ≤ 15 mm. Consecutive patients who underwent EUS-TA for SPLs ≤ 15 mm between January 2015 and December 2022 in a tertiary referral center were retrospectively evaluated. The primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy. The final diagnosis was based on surgical pathology or disease evolution after a minimum follow-up of 6 months. Inadequate samples were all considered false negatives for the study. Secondary outcomes included sample adequacy, factors impacting accuracy, and safety. We included 368 patients (52.4% male; mean age: 60.2 years) who underwent FNA in 72 cases and FNB in 296. The mean size of SPLs was 11.9 ± 2.6 mm. More than three passes were performed in 5.7% and 61.5% of patients in the FNB and FNA groups, respectively (p < 0.0001). FNB outperformed FNA in terms of diagnostic accuracy (89.8% vs. 79.1%, p = 0.013) and sample adequacy (95.9% vs. 86.1%, p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, using FNA (OR: 2.10, 95% CI: 1.07-4.48) and a final diagnosis (OR: 3.56, 95% CI: 1.82-6.94) of benign conditions negatively impacted accuracy. Overall, the adverse event rate was 0.8%, including one pancreatitis in the FNA group and one pancreatitis and one bleeding in the FNB group, all mild and conservatively managed. EUS-TA for SPLs ≤ 15 mm has a high diagnostic yield and safety. This study suggests the superiority of FNB over FNA, with better performance even with fewer passes performed.

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.

Effect of artificial intelligence on novice-performed colonoscopy: a multicenter randomized controlled tandem study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The efficacy and safety of colonoscopy performed by artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted novices remain unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the lesion detection capability of novices, AI-assisted novices, and experts.

METHODS

This multicenter, randomized, noninferiority tandem study was conducted across 3 hospitals in China from May 1, 2022, to November 11, 2022. Eligible patients were randomized into 1 of 3 groups: the CN group (control novice group, withdrawal performed by a novice independently), the AN group (AI-assisted novice group, withdrawal performed by a novice with AI assistance), or the CE group (control expert group, withdrawal performed by an expert independently). Participants underwent a repeat colonoscopy conducted by an AI-assisted expert to evaluate the lesion miss rate and ensure lesion detection. The primary outcome was the adenoma miss rate (AMR).

RESULTS

A total of 685 eligible patients were analyzed: 229 in the CN group, 227 in the AN group, and 229 in the CE group. Both AMR and polyp miss rate were lower in the AN group than in the CN group (18.82% vs 43.69% [P < .001] and 21.23% vs 35.38% [P < .001], respectively). The noninferiority margin was met between the AN and CE groups of both AMR and polyp miss rate (18.82% vs 26.97% [P = .202] and 21.23% vs 24.10% [P < .249]).

CONCLUSIONS

AI-assisted colonoscopy lowered the AMR of novices, making them noninferior to experts. The withdrawal technique of new endoscopists can be enhanced by AI-assisted colonoscopy. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT05323279.).

Comparing fine needle biopsy techniques in solid pancreatic lesions: A prospective randomized study

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsies (EUS-FNB) are the best technique for sampling solid pancreatic lesions. However, the most appropriate biopsy technique has not been standardized using Fine Needle Biopsy (FNB) needles. The aim of this work was to identify the best biopsy technique to achieve the best tissue integrity and cause the least blood contamination.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients ≥18 years of age with solid pancreatic lesions who underwent EUS-FNB at our institution from January 2020 to May 2021 were consecutively selected. Three passes were performed with each of the threee techniques to obtain tissue: suction with 10 ml of vacuum, capillary, and wet. An independent pathologist evaluated the received tissue integrity and the degree of blood contamination of each sample according to scales.

RESULTS

Seventy-five patients were recruited for our study. A superior tissue integrity was observed using the wet-suction technique in lesions located in the body and/or tail of the pancreas, and an average score of 4.40 (p = 0.027) was assigned for this technique. Regarding the contamination of the sample in the whole cohort, the simple-suction technique shown a higher contamination, 1.55 (p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference among the techniques when evaluating tissue integrity or contamination in lesions larger or smaller than 3 cm.

CONCLUSION

When performing EUS-FNB for solid pancreatic lesions located in the head/uncinated process, the three methods provided similar diagnostic yields. The wet-suction technique had a higher score in tissue integrity when lesions were located in the body and/or tail of the pancreas.

The reproducibility of interventional radiology randomized controlled trials and external validation of a classification system

PURPOSE

The fragility index (FI) measures the robustness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). It complements the P value by taking into account the number of outcome events. In this study, the authors measured the FI for major interventional radiology RCTs.

METHODS

Interventional radiology RCTs published between January 2010 and December 2022 relating to trans-jugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt, trans-arterial chemoembolization, needle biopsy, angiography, angioplasty, thrombolysis, and nephrostomy tube insertion were analyzed to measure the FI and robustness of the studies.

RESULTS

A total of 34 RCTs were included. The median FI of those studies was 4.5 (range 1-68). Seven trials (20.6%) had a number of patients lost to follow-up that was higher than their FI, and 15 (44.1%) had a FI of 1-3.

CONCLUSION

The median FI, and hence the reproducibility of interventional radiology RCTs, is low compared to other medical fields, with some having a FI of 1, which should be interrupted cautiously.

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.

Current Practice Patterns of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Sampling for Pancreatic Solid Mass in Korea: Outcomes of a National Survey

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Although endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) and fine needle biopsy (FNB) are widely used for tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid mass, the optimal strategy of this procedure has not been established yet. The aim of this nationwide study was to investigate the current practice patterns of EUS-FNA/FNB for pancreatic solid mass in Korea.

METHODS

The Policy-Quality Management of the Korean Pancreatobiliary Association (KPBA) developed a questionnaire containing 22 questions. An electronic survey consisting of the questionnaire was distributed by e-mail to members registered to the KPBA.

RESULTS

A total of 101 respondents completed the survey. Eighty respondents (79.2%) performed preoperative EUS-FNA/FNB for operable pancreatic solid mass. Acquire needles (60.4%) were used the most, followed by ProCore needles (47.5%). In terms of need size, most respondents (>80%) preferred 22-gauge needles regardless of the location of the mass. Negative suction with a 10-mL syringe (71.3%) as sampling technique was followed by stylet slow-pull (41.6%). More than three needle passes for EUS-FNA/FNB was performed by most respondents (>80%). The frequency of requiring repeated procedure was significantly higher in respondents with a low individual volume (<5 per month, p=0.001). Prophylactic antibiotics were routinely used in 39 respondents (38.6%); rapid on-site pathologic evaluation was used in 6.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

According to this survey, practices of EUS-FNA/FNB for pancreatic solid mass varied substantially, some of which differed considerably from the recommendations present in existing guidelines. These results suggest that the development of evidence-based quality guidelines fitting Korean clinical practice is needed to establish the optimal strategy for this procedure.

Next-Generation Sequencing Analysis of Pancreatic Cancer Using Residual Liquid Cytology Specimens from Endoscopic Ultrasound—Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy: A Prospective Comparative Study with Tissue Specimens

This study evaluated the feasibility and clinical utility of liquid-based cytology (LBC) specimens via endoscopic ultrasound–guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) for next-generation sequencing (NGS) of pancreatic cancer (PC). We prospectively evaluated the performance of DNA extraction and NGS using EUS-FNB samples obtained from PC. Thirty-three consecutive patients with PC who underwent EUS-FNB at our hospital were enrolled. DNA samples were obtained from 96.8% of the patients. When stratified with a variant allele frequency (VAF) > 10% tumor burden, the NGS success rate was 76.7% (n = 23) in formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE), 83.3% (n = 25) in LBC, and 76.7% (n = 23) in frozen samples. The overall NGS success rate was 86.7% (n = 26) using FFPE, LBC, or frozen samples. The detection rates for the main mutated genes were as follows: 86.7% for KRAS, 73.3% for TP53, 66.7% for CDKN2A, 36.7% for SMAD4, and 16.7% for ARID1A. LBC had the highest median value of VAF (23.5%) for KRAS and TP53. PC mutation analysis using NGS was successfully performed using LBC compared with FFPE and frozen samples. This approach provides an alternative and affordable source of molecular testing materials.

GIE Editorial Board Top 10: advances in GI endoscopy in 2021

The 9-member Editorial Board of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy performed a systematic literature search of original articles published during 2021 in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and 10 other high-impact medical and gastroenterology journals on endoscopy-related topics. Votes from each editorial board member were tallied to identify a consensus list of the 10 most significant topic areas in GI endoscopy over the calendar year of study, with a focus on 3 criteria: significance, novelty, and global impact on clinical practice. The 10 areas identified collectively represent advances in the following endoscopic topics: colonoscopy optimization, bariatric endoscopy, endoscopic needle sampling and drainage, peroral endoscopic myotomy, endoscopic defect closure, meeting systemic challenges in endoscopic training and practice, endohepatology, FNA versus fine-needle biopsy sampling, endoscopic mucosal and submucosal procedures, and cold snare polypectomy. Each board member contributed a summary of important articles relevant to 1 to 2 of the consensus topic areas, leading to a collective summary that is presented in this document of the "top 10" endoscopic advances of 2021.

Comparative diagnostic performance of end-cutting fine-needle biopsy needles for EUS tissue sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Evidence is limited on the comparative diagnostic performance of newer end-cutting fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles for tissue sampling of pancreatic masses. We performed a systematic review with network meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic accuracy of available FNB needles for sampling of solid pancreatic lesions.

METHODS

A systematic literature review (Medline and Cochrane Database) was conducted for studies evaluating the accuracy of newer FNB needles in adults undergoing EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy. Secondary outcomes were sample adequacy, diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and adverse event rate. We performed pairwise and network meta-analyses and appraised the quality of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology.

RESULTS

Overall, 16 RCTs (1934 patients) were identified. On network meta-analysis, Franseen needles (Acquire; Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Mass, USA) significantly outperformed reverse-bevel needles (risk ratio [RR], 1.21 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.05-1.40] for accuracy and 1.31 [95% CI, 1.05-1.22] for adequacy) and FNA needles (RR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.01-1.25] for accuracy and 1.07 [95% CI, 1.02-1.13] for adequacy). Likewise, the Fork-tip needle (SharkCore; Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland) was significantly superior to the reverse-bevel needle (RR, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.03-1.33] for accuracy and 1.09 [95% CI, 1.02-1.16] for adequacy) and to the FNA needle (RR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.01-1.19] for accuracy and 1.03 [95% CI, 1.01-1.07] for adequacy). Other comparisons did not achieve statistical significance. As a consequence, Franseen (surface under the cumulative ranking score, .89 for accuracy and .94 for adequacy) and Fork-tip needles (surface under the cumulative ranking score, .76 for accuracy and .73 for adequacy) ranked as the 2 highest-performing FNB needles. When considering different needle sizes, 25-gauge Franseen and 25-gauge Fork-tip needles were not superior to 22-gauge reverse-bevel needles (RR, 1.18 [95% CI, .96-1.46] and 1.04 [95% CI, .62-1.52]). None of the tested needles was significantly superior to the other FNB devices or to FNA needles when rapid onsite cytologic evaluation was available.

CONCLUSIONS

Franseen and Fork-tip needles, particularly 22-gauge size, showed the highest performance for tissue sampling of pancreatic masses, with low confidence in estimates.

Promising Genomic Testing for Biliary Tract Cancer Using Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration/Biopsy Specimens

The undesired prognosis of biliary tract cancer is mainly attributed to the difficult detection of cancer lesions, including intraepithelial neoplasia and no standard examination for screening. In addition, pathological diagnosis of biliary stricture, whether it is malignant or benign, is not so easy, because of difficult optimal sampling by forceps biopsy and brush cytology, although various devices and methods for pathological diagnosis have been reported. Furthermore, we have to be careful about post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiography pancreatitis when we approach the biliary tract lesion via a transpapillary route. In order to improve the diagnostic accuracy, there have been several studies that indicate the feasibility and efficacy of genomic analysis for accurate diagnosis of biliary tract cancer by using pathological specimens, including endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration/biopsy (EUS-FNA/FNB) samples. For efficient and precision medicine for patients with biliary tract cancer, future diagnosis and treatment should also be based on molecular and genetic analyses. In this article, we review and summarize the past knowledge and cutting edge of genomic testing for biliary tract cancer, using EUS-FNA/FNB specimens, and indicate some ingenuities in sample processing to promote effective clinical practice and future perspectives.