The diagnostic accuracy of 22-gauge and 25-gauge needles in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: a meta-analysis

Prospective randomized study comparing Franseen 22-gauge vs standard 22-gauge needle for endoscopic ultrasound guided sampling of pancreatic solid lesions

BACKGROUND

This is a randomized study to compare the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling of pancreatic solid lesions obtained with the 22-gauge Franseen (EUS-fine needle biopsy) vs the 22-gauge standard needle (EUS-fine needle aspiration) without rapid onsite evaluation (ROSE), since, in most endoscopy units around the world ROSE is not routinely available.

AIM

To investigate the accuracy of EUS-guided sampling of pancreatic solid lesions obtained between two different needles without ROSE.

METHODS

Patients with a solid pancreatic were included. Patients were biopsied in a randomized order. The primary endpoint was the diagnostic sensitivity for pancreatic malignancy (PM). Secondary outcomes were adequacy of the sample, the mean tissue area, the mean tumor area, and the adverse event rate.

RESULTS

The final diagnosis was pancreatic adenocarcinoma in 38 (76%), neuroendocrine tumor in 4 (8%), chronic pancreatitis in 3 (6%) patients. The sensitivity for PM with Franseen needle was 0.91 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.80-0.98], vs 0.8 (95%CI: 0.67-0.91) (P = 0.025) with standard needle. The specificity for PM did not differentiate. The accuracy of the standard needle for PM was 0.80 (95%CI: 0.66-0.90), and the Franseen group was 0.90 (95%CI: 0.78-0.97) (P = 0.074). The technical success rates for the standard and Franseen needle groups were 94% (95%CI: 0.83-0.99) and 100% (95%CI: 0.92-1.00), respectively. The mean total tissue area in mm2 (SD) was greater in the Franseen group, 2.07 (0.22) vs 1.16 (0.17) (P < 0.01). The mean tumor area in mm2 (SD) was not different in Franseen group vs standard group, 0.42 (0.09) vs 0.47 (0.09) (P = 0.80). There were no adverse events.

CONCLUSION

The sensitivity for PM and mean total tissue area, was greater in the as compared with standard needle. The mean tumor area did not differ between the groups.

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

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

Endoscopic Ultrasound armamentarium for precise and early diagnosis of biliopancreatic lesions

The diagnostic paradigm for biliopancreatic lesions has been revolutionized by continuous advancements in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) technologies and techniques. This review examines the expanding diagnostic toolkit available to clinicians, emphasizing innovations that have significantly enhanced precision and early detection capabilities. One of the most transformative advancements is the development of fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles. Modern designs, including Franseen, and fork-tip configurations, have optimized tissue sampling, achieving diagnostic accuracies exceeding 90 % while minimizing the number of needle passes required. These innovations facilitate the acquisition of high-quality histological specimens suitable for comprehensive molecular profiling, paving the way for personalized therapeutic approaches. Concurrent advancements in sampling techniques have bolstered these needle design improvements. The fanning technique has been particularly effective, increasing diagnostic yields from 71 % to 88 %. Wet suction methods preserve tissue integrity better than traditional approaches, while standardized protocols for needle passes enhance procedural efficiency. For specimen evaluation, Rapid On-Site Evaluation (ROSE) offers 93 % sensitivity, while alternatives like Macroscopic On-Site Evaluation (MOSE) provide comparable accuracy while reducing dependency on specialized personnel and resources. Image enhancement technologies have markedly improved the ability to characterize lesions. Contrast Harmonic EUS (CH-EUS) is particularly effective in differentiating pancreatic cancer from other solid lesions, with meta-analyses confirming sensitivity and specificity of 94 % and 89 %, respectively. Its ability to detect lesions as small as 15 mm makes it invaluable for early diagnosis. In cystic lesions, CH-EUS excels in identifying malignant mural nodules, with diagnostic accuracies reaching 96 %. The integration of elastography and advanced digital imaging technologies has further expanded diagnostic capabilities. Strain elastography provides qualitative insights into tissue characteristics, while shear wave elastography offers quantitative measurements of stiffness, adding diagnostic precision. Similarly, technologies like detective flow imaging match the accuracy of contrast-enhanced techniques in pancreatic cancer detection and enhance vascular assessment. For cystic lesions, diagnostics have progressed beyond traditional fluid analysis. Techniques such as through-the-needle biopsy (TTNB) have improved diagnostic yields to 74 %, albeit with a modest risk of complications. Incorporating molecular markers and next-generation sequencing allows differentiation between cystic lesion subtypes and more accurate assessment of malignant potential. This array of diagnostic tools offers unprecedented potential for early and precise diagnosis of biliopancreatic lesions. Integrating these innovations into clinical practice requires careful consideration of their strengths and limitations. Future research should aim to standardize protocols and establish evidence-based algorithms for their combined use, with the ultimate goal of improving patient outcomes through earlier detection and tailored management of biliopancreatic pathologies.

Advances in Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Based Diagnosis of Pancreatic Lesions: Narrative Review

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth deadliest cancer in the U [...].

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in the diagnostic value of focal liver lesions: A systematic analysis of 88 cases (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is an important diagnostic tool for suspected parenchymal lesions in the gastrointestinal tract and adjacent organs. Our study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of EUS-FNA in focal liver lesions (FLLs).

METHOD

Data from 88 patients diagnosed with FLLs by imaging who underwent EUS-FNA from 1 January 2017 to 31 August 2022 were reviewed in our retrospective study at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University and Ruijin Hospital of the School of Medicine of Shanghai Jiao Tong University. The EUS-FNA biopsy results were compared with the final diagnosis to evaluate diagnostic value. The relevant factors were analysed to determine their influence on EUS-FNA biopsy results.

RESULTS

The 88 patients analysed in this study resulted in a final diagnosis of 86 malignant and two benign cases. The overall diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA in FLLs was 93.18 % (82/88; 95 % Confidence Interval [CI], 87.9-98.5), with a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 93.02 % (80/86; 95 %CI, 87.6-98.4), 100 % (2/2; 95 %CI, 100-100), 100 % (80/80; 95 %CI, 100-100), and 25 % (2/8; 95 %CI, -5-55.0), respectively. The parameters related to lesion and procedure were not significantly different between these two groups (p > 0.05). The number of puncture needles in the groups showed a statistically significant difference between multiple and single punctures (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our data revealed that EUS-FNA is a safe and reliable diagnostic method for FLLs that shows high accuracy.

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.

Outcomes of Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine Needle Biopsy Using a Novel Hydrostatic Stylet Tissue Acquisition Technique

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) is frequently used to obtain core samples of solid lesions. Here, we describe and evaluate a novel hydrostatic stylet (HS) technique designed to optimize core sample acquisition, reporting diagnostic yield, efficacy, and safety relative to the conventional stylet slow-pull (SP) technique.

METHODS

A novel HS technique was developed and validated retrospectively. Consecutive patients who underwent EUS-FNB with core biopsy of solid lesions through either the HS or SP technique between January 2020 and April 2022 were included. Exclusion criteria included cystic lesions, nonlesional liver biopsies, and specimens sent for cytologic analysis only. Patient and lesion characteristics, number of passes, sample adequacy, and adverse events were compared between the two techniques.

RESULTS

A total of 272 patients were included with 138 in the HS group and 134 in the SP group. Lesion size and anatomic distribution were similar in both groups. Compared with the SP approach, the HS technique demonstrated significantly higher sample adequacy (97.8% vs 83.6%, P < 0.001), higher sensitivity (97.1% vs 89.7%, P = 0.03), and lower mean number of passes (1.2 vs 3.3, P < 0.001). Rates and severity of adverse events in the HS group were comparable to the SP group and existing literature. Similar associations were observed in pancreatic and nonpancreatic lesion subanalyses.

CONCLUSIONS

The novel HS technique demonstrated excellent biopsy sample adequacy and diagnostic yield while requiring fewer passes to obtain diagnostic specimens compared with a conventional EUS-FNB approach. Further prospective evaluation is needed to confirm these pilot findings and optimize EUS-FNB acquisition techniques.

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.

K-ras gene mutation analysis to diagnosis pancreatic adenocarcinoma from endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition; a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) has high sensitivity for the pathological diagnosis of pancreatic masses, but also a high false-negative rate. K-ras gene mutations occur in over 75 % of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDAC), and this meta-analysis evaluated the utility of detecting K-ras gene mutations from EUS-TA specimens for the diagnosis of PDAC.

METHODS

Relevant studies in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were systematically searched. Meta-analysis was performed on data from the selected studies using a bivariate model to provide pooled values of sensitivity, specificity, and their 95 % confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included 1521 patients (from 10 eligible studies) who underwent EUS-TA with K-ras gene mutation analysis for diagnosis of pancreatic solid masses. The pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity were 76.6 % (95 % CI, 70.9-81.5 %) and 97.0 % (95 % CI, 94.0-98.5 %), respectively, for pathological diagnosis, 75.9 % (95 % CI 69.5-81.4 %) and 95.3 % (95 % CI, 92.3-97.2 %) for K-ras gene mutation analysis, and 88.7 % (95 % CI 87.1-91.7 %) and 94.9 % (95 % CI, 91.5-97.0 %) for pathological diagnosis in combination with K-ras gene mutation analysis. The sensitivity for diagnosis of PDAC was significantly higher for pathological diagnosis in combination with K-ras gene mutation analysis than for pathological diagnosis or K-ras gene mutation analysis alone (both, p < 0.001). There was no difference in specificity between pathological diagnosis in combination with K-ras gene mutation analysis and both either (p = 0.234, 0.945, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

K-ras gene mutation analysis in combination with to pathological diagnosis of EUS-TA increases the accuracy of differential diagnosis of PDAC.

Comparing the diagnostic adequacy of 25-Gauge fork-tip versus franseen versus reverse-bevel-type needles in EUS-guided tissue acquisition: A prospective randomized study with a retrospective control

Background and Objectives

EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (FNB) is an established technique for the acquisition of tissue to diagnose lesions of the gastrointestinal tract and surrounding organs. Recently, newer-generation FNB needles have been introduced, including a second-generation reverse-bevel and the third-generation fork-tip and Franseen needles. We aimed to determine if there was any difference between these needles in terms of cytopathological diagnostic yield, sample cellularity, or sample bloodiness.

Methods

One hundred twenty-seven consecutive patients undergoing EUS-guided FNB of any solid lesion were randomized to use either a Franseen or fork-tip needle in a 1:1 ratio and were compared with 60 consecutive historical cases performed with reverse-bevel needles. Patient and procedure characteristics were recorded. Cases were reviewed by a blinded cytopathologist and graded based on cellularity and bloodiness. Overall diagnostic yield was calculated for each study arm.

Results

One hundred seventy-six cases were eligible for analysis, including 109 pancreatic masses, 24 lymphoid lesions, 17 subepithelial lesions, and 26 other lesions. The final diagnosis was malignancy in 127 cases (72%). EUS-guided FNB was diagnostic in 141 cases (80%) overall and in 89% of cases where malignancy was the final diagnosis. There was no difference in diagnostic yield, sample cellularity, or sample bloodiness between the different needle types. There was no difference in adverse events between groups.

Conclusions

EUS-guided FNB performed using 25-gauge Franseen, fork-tip, and reverse-bevel needles resulted in similar diagnostic yield, sample cellularity, and sample bloodiness. Our results may not be extrapolated to larger-caliber needles of the same design.

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.

Current status and issues in genomic analysis using EUS-FNA/FNB specimens in hepatobiliary-pancreatic cancers

Comprehensive genomic profiling based on next-generation sequencing has recently been used to provide precision medicine for various advanced cancers. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) play essential roles in the diagnosis of abdominal masses, mainly pancreatic cancers. In recent years, CGP analysis using EUS-FNA/FNB specimens for hepatobiliary-pancreatic cancers has increased; however, the success rate of CGP analysis is not clinically satisfactory, and many issues need to be resolved to improve the success rate of CGP analysis. In this article, we review the transition from EUS-FNA to FNB, compare each test, and discuss the current status and issues in genomic analysis of hepatobiliary-pancreatic cancers using EUS-FNA/FNB specimens.

Randomized trial comparing 15 vs 5 actuations per pass during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy for specimen acquisition of solid pancreatic lesions

BACKGROUND AND AIM

There is currently no established number of actuations (to-and-fro movements) per pass during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB). This study aimed to compare 15 vs 5 actuations in terms of adequate specimen acquisition of solid pancreatic lesions.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized, crossover, noninferiority, single-center study, eligible patients underwent EUS-FNB using a 22-G Franseen needle with both 15 and 5 actuations per pass, performed in a randomized order, from October 2020 to December 2021. The acquired specimens from each pass were separately evaluated. The primary outcome was the accuracy of the histological diagnosis per pass. The noninferiority margin was set as 15%.

RESULTS

Data from 85 patients were analyzed, revealing pancreatic cancer in 73 patients. The accuracy of the histological diagnosis in the 15 and 5 actuations groups was 83.5% (71/85) and 77.7% (66/85), respectively. The difference was -5.8% (95% confidence interval -15.6-3.4), which does not indicate noninferiority of the five actuations group. Among the secondary outcomes, the 15 actuations group was significantly superior to the five actuations group in terms of the obtained core tissues (1.88 [interquartile range 0.89-3.64] mm2 vs 1.66 [0.83-2.71] mm2 [P = 0.031]) and subjective evaluation of cytology specimens for pancreatic cancer (69.0% vs. 31.0%, P = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

The noninferiority of five actuations in the accuracy of the histological diagnosis was not confirmed, and 15 actuations are preferred during EUS-FNB for solid pancreatic lesions.

Anesthesia care provider sedation versus conscious sedation for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

We aimed to study the effects of sedation on endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study evaluating the role of sedation in endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition by comparing two groups: anesthesia care provider (ACP) sedation and endoscopist-directed conscious sedation (CS).

RESULTS

Technical success was achieved in 219/233 (94.0%) in the ACP group and 114/136 (83.8%) in the CS group (p=0.0086). In multivariate analysis, the difference in technical success between the two groups was not significant (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.234-1.069; p=0.0738). A successful diagnostic yield was present in 146/196 (74.5%) in the ACP group and 66/106 (62.3%) in the CS group, respectively (p=0.0274). In multivariate analysis, the difference in diagnostic yield between the two groups was not significant (aOR, 0.643; 95% CI, 0.356-1.159; p=0.142). A total of 33 adverse events (AEs) were observed. The incidence of AEs was significantly lower in the CS group (5/33 CS vs. 28/33 ACP; OR, 0.281; 95% CI, 0.095-0.833; p=0.022).

CONCLUSION

CS provided equivalent technical success and diagnostic yield for malignancy in endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition. Increased AEs were associated with anesthesia for the endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition.

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.

Telecytology versus in-room cytopathologist for EUS-guided FNA or fine-needle biopsy sampling of solid pancreatic lesions

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Rapid on-site-evaluation (ROSE) with an in-room cytopathologist (ROSE-P) has been shown to improve the diagnostic yield of specimens obtained from patients undergoing EUS-guided FNA or fine-needle biopsy sampling (EUS-FNAB) of pancreatic lesions. Recently, there has been an increased interest and use of ROSE using telecytology (ROSE-T) to optimize clinical workflows and to address social distancing mandates created during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to compare diagnostic outcomes of ROSE-P and ROSE-T.

METHODS

A single-center cohort study of patients who underwent EUS-FNAB of solid pancreatic lesions with ROSE was conducted. The primary outcome was overall diagnostic yield of cancer. All patients who underwent EUS-FNAB were entered into a prospectively maintained database. Statistical analyses were performed using descriptive statistics and univariate analysis.

RESULTS

There were 165 patients in each arm. There was no difference in diagnostic yield between ROSE-P and ROSE-T (96.4% vs 94.5%, P = .428). ROSE-T was associated with an increased use of 22-gauge needles (P = .006) and more needle passes (P < .001). No significant differences were found in age, gender, lesion size, needle type, procedure times, or adverse events between the 2 groups (P < .05 for all). More pancreatic tail lesions were sampled in the ROSE-P group (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

ROSE-T was not associated with any difference in final histologic diagnosis for EUS-FNAB of solid pancreatic masses. This has important implications for optimizing clinical workflows.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the era of precision medicine

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) currently plays a central role in the diagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Although fine-needle aspiration has been the gold standard, novel biopsy needles for fine-needle biopsy (FNB) were developed to overcome its limitations, which include low tumor cellularity and the inability to retain cellular architecture. Following recent improvements in FNB needles, the pathological diagnosis has shifted from cytology to histology and now to genetic diagnosis. Genetic analysis using EUS-TA samples began with a search for the presence of K-ras mutations. However, the introduction of next-generation sequencers has dramatically changed genetic analysis and led to the gradual elucidation of the mechanism of PDAC, enabling personalized medicine by performing multiple gene analyses simultaneously. Comprehensive genomic profiling is currently applied in the clinical setting and there is an increasing need for gene analysis using EUS-TA samples. Although target genome sequencing is feasible even with cytological specimens, it can be difficult to proceed with full genetic analysis including whole-exome sequence or whole-genome sequence if the samples are too small. Genetic analysis will become highly important in determining indications for personalized medicine such as poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors or immune checkpoint inhibitors. Therefore, the endosonographer must always take gene analysis into consideration when collecting samples for diagnosis and further improvement of the puncture technique and needle development are anticipated in the future.

Early detection of pancreatic tumors by advanced EUS imaging

The early detection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) dramatically improves outcome. All available state-of-the-art imaging methods allow early detection with EUS being the best technique for exclusion of PDAC and detection of very early PDAC. Etiological differentiation of small SPL is important to guide individually tailored patients' management including radical surgery in resectable PDAC, medical (neoadjuvant or palliative intended) treatment in patients with non-resectable malignancy, pancreatic parenchyma saving strategies in some non-PDAC, and follow-up in particular in low-grade PanNEN or other small benign lesions. Multimodality EUS imaging including B-Mode assessment, elastography, contrast-enhancement and EUS-guided sampling is the most appropriate technique for diagnosis and risk assessment of small SPL. We present a review discussing modern (endoscopic) ultrasound imaging techniques including contrast enhanced ultrasound and elastography for the early detection and characterization of solid pancreatic lesions.

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

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

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic sampling for the histopathological diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis

Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP), which is characterized by pancreatic enlargement and irregular narrowing of the main pancreatic duct, is difficult to differentiate from malignancy. The irregular narrowing of the pancreatic duct, which can be detected via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, is a characteristic feature of AIP; however, distinguishing between localized AIP and pancreatic cancer based on pancreatic duct imaging is difficult. This study overviews the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided pancreatic sampling for the histopathological diagnosis of AIP. Recent enhancements in needle biopsy methodologies and technologies have contributed to improvement in the diagnostic efficacy of this technique. The guidance provided in this study for the histological diagnosis of AIP is anticipated to further advance in the histopathological diagnosis of AIP using EUS-guided pancreatic sampling.

Comparison of the efficiency of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration using a 22G needle versus 25G needle for the diagnosis of lymph node metastasis in patients with lung cancer: a prospective randomized, crossover study

Background

Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is generally performed for the diagnosis of hilar/mediastinal lymph node metastasis in patients with lung cancer. Recently, a 25-gauge (G) needle became available, but robust evidence of its usefulness in routine clinical practice is still lacking.

Methods

A prospective randomized crossover trial was performed, in which patients with suspected hilar/mediastinal lymph node metastasis of lung cancer underwent EBUS-TBNA. The primary endpoint was the rate of yield histology specimens containing malignant cells.

Results

From December 2018 to February 2020, 102 patients were randomly assigned to EBUS-TBNA using a 22G needle first, followed by a 25G needle (n=50) or EBUS-TBNA using a 25G needle first, followed by a 22G needle (n=52). There was no difference in the diagnostic yield of malignancy between the histology specimens obtained by using the 22G and 25G needles (75% vs. 75%, respectively, P=0.37). The sizes of the tissue samples (16.4 vs. 4.9 mm², respectively) and number of malignant cells in the tissue samples (626 vs. 400, respectively) were both significantly higher when using the 22G needle than when using the 25G needle.

Conclusions

No significant difference in the diagnostic yield between the 22G and 25G needles was observed for the diagnosis of lymph node metastasis of lung cancer, suggesting that needles of either gauge could be used for the biopsy. However, we would recommend use of the 22G needle, because it provided larger specimens and specimens containing larger numbers of malignant cells.

Trial Registration

University hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trial Registry (ID: UMIN000036680).

Vitrectomy-Assisted Biopsy: An in vitro Study on the Impact of Cut Rate and Probe Size

Purpose

The aim of this study was to optimize the technique of performing vitrectomy-assisted biopsy of intraocular tumors by comparing the cytohistological findings in specimens obtained with different vitrectomy probes and cut rates.

Methods

Vitrectomy-assisted biopsies were taken from a fresh porcine liver. For each sampling, the vacuum level was 300 mm Hg. The following parameters were compared; cut rate (60, 600 and 6,000 cuts per minute [cpm]), probe type (standard and two-dimensional cutting [TDC]), and probe diameter (23-gauge and 25-gauge). The specimens were assessed by automated whole-slide imaging analysis and conventional light microscopy.

Results

Seventy-two biopsies were analyzed for the number of hepatocytes, total area of tissue fragments, and total stained area of each microscope slide. For all probe types, these parameters were significantly and positively correlated with the cut rate. TDC probes led to significantly higher scores than those of standard probes, independent of the cut rate. There were no significant differences in results when using 23-gauge or 25-gauge standard probes. Light microscopic examination demonstrated well-preserved cells sufficient for cytohistological analyses in all investigated cases.

Conclusions

The higher the cut rate, the larger is the amount of aspirated cellular material. There were no significant differences between 23-gauge and 25-gauge biopsies. Cut rates up to 6,000 cpm did not adversely affect the cytohistological features of the samples.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition for the histopathological diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis

Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is a disease concept that originated in Japan. It is characterized by diffuse pancreatic enlargement and irregular narrowing of the main pancreatic duct. Although the usefulness of the histological diagnosis of AIP using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (FNB) has been reported, enhanced diagnostic performance is expected with improvements in tissue collection methods and fine-needle techniques. Guidance for establishing the tissue diagnosis of AIP has been developed and is useful for histological evaluation. Histopathological diagnosis by EUS-FNA/FNB is expected to play a central role in AIP diagnosis in the future.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy histology with a 22-gauge Franseen needle and fine-needle aspiration liquid-based cytology with a conventional 25-gauge needle provide comparable diagnostic accuracy in solid pancreatic lesions

Background and Aim

Fine‐needle biopsy (FNB) needles obtain more core samples and support the shift from cytologic to histologic evaluation; however, recent studies have proposed a superior diagnostic potential for liquid‐based cytology (LBC). This study compared the diagnostic ability of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)‐guided FNB histology with a 22‐gauge Franseen needle (22G‐FNB‐H) and fine‐needle aspiration (FNA) LBC with a conventional 25‐gauge needle (25G‐FNA‐LBC).

Methods

We analyzed 46 patients who underwent both 22G‐FNB‐H and 25G‐FNA‐LBC in the same lesion during the same endoscopic procedure. This study evaluated the diagnostic ability of each needle, diagnostic concordance between needles, and incremental diagnostic effect of both needles compared to using each needle alone.

Results

The agreement rate for malignancy between both techniques was 93.5% (kappa value = 0.82). There was no significant difference in the diagnostic ability of both methods. 22G‐FNB‐H and 25G‐FNA‐LBC provided an incremental diagnostic accuracy in two (4.3%) cases and one (2.2%) case, respectively.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrated that the diagnostic accuracy of 25G‐FNA‐LBC and 22G‐FNA‐H for solid pancreatic lesions were comparable. A conventional 25‐gauge needle that punctures lesions with ease can be used in difficult cases and according to the skill of the endoscopist.

Usefulness of a target sample check illuminator in the detection of target specimens in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy samples: Multicenter prospective study

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) uses a thin needle, rendering unclear whether the collected sample contains pathological evidence. We examined the usefulness of our target sample check illuminator (TSCI) through a multicenter prospective trial.

METHODS

We included 52 consecutive patients. After assessing EUS-FNB samples by conventional (visual observation) and TSCI methods, we evaluated consistency with the histopathological diagnosis. We compared the target sample confirmation rate between conventional and TSCI methods and evaluated the diagnostic ability separately.

RESULTS

Comparison between the conventional and TSCI methods revealed the following: (i) for all cases: sensitivity, 51.0% (25/49) vs. 95.9% (47/49) (P = 0.001); specificity, 100% (3/3) vs. 66.7% (2/3); positive predictive value (PPV), 100% (25/25) vs. 97.9% (47/48); and negative predictive value (NPV), 11.1% (3/27) vs. 50.0% (2/4) (P = 0.002); (ii) for pancreatic masses: sensitivity, 28.0% (7/25) vs. 96.0% (24/25) (P < 0.001); specificity, 100% (2/2) vs. 100% (2/2); PPV, 100% (7/7) vs. 100% (24/24); and NPV, 10.0% (2/20) vs. 66.7% (2/3) (P < 0.001) (the TSCI method showed significantly better sensitivity and NPV than the conventional method); and (iii) for lymph node tumors: sensitivity, 75.0% (18/24) vs. 95.8% (23/24) (P = 0.025); specificity, 100% (1/1) vs. 0% (0/1); PPV, 100% (18/18) vs. 95.8% (23/24); and NPV, 14.3% (1/7) vs. 0% (0/1).

CONCLUSIONS

The TSCI improved the sensitivity, NPV, and accuracy of target sample confirmation for pancreatic mass EUS-FNB. Although the proportion of samples not including a target region was quite low, which could strongly influence our results, the TSCI method can be used in EUS-FNB when rapid on-site evaluation cannot be performed. (A multicenter prospective study for the utility of a target sample check illuminator, Clinical Trial ID: UMIN000023349).

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and the management of pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related mortality in western countries. Early diagnosis of pancreatic cancers plays a key role in the management by identification of patients who are surgical candidates. The advancement in the radiological imaging and interventional endoscopy (including endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic enteral stenting techniques) has a significant impact in the diagnostic evaluation, staging and treatment of pancreatic cancer. The multidisciplinary involvement of radiology, gastroenterology, medical oncology and surgical oncology is central to the management of patients with pancreatic cancers. This review aims to highlight the diagnostic and therapeutic role of EUS in the management of patients with pancreatic malignancy, especially pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Comparative diagnostic accuracy of EUS needles in solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis

Background and study aims  Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue sampling is the standard of care for diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions. While many two-way comparisons between needle types have been made in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), it is unclear which size and type of needle offers the best probability of diagnosis. We therefore performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to compare different sized and shaped needles to rank the diagnostic performance of each needle. Methods  We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases through August, 2020 for RCTs that compared the diagnostic accuracy of EUS fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and biopsy (FNB) needles in solid pancreatic masses. Using a random-effects NMA under the frequentist framework, RCTs were analyzed to identify the best needle type and sampling technique. Performance scores (P-scores) were used to rank the different needles based on pooled diagnostic accuracy. The NMA model was used to calculate pairwise relative risk (RR) with 95 % confidence intervals. Results  Review of 2577 studies yielded 29 RCTs for quantitative synthesis, comparing 13 different needle types. All 22G FNB needles had an RR > 1 compared to the reference 22G FNA (Cook) needle. The highest P-scores were seen with the 22G Medtronic FNB needle (0.9279), followed by the 22G Olympus FNB needle (0.8962) and the 22G Boston Scientific FNB needle (0.8739). Diagnostic accuracy was not significantly different between needles with or without suction. Conclusions  In comparison to FNA needles, FNB needles offer the highest diagnostic performance in sampling pancreatic masses, particularly with 22G FNB needles.

The Impact of Recent Advances in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition on the Management of Pancreatic Cancer

Over the last few decades, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition has become the method of choice for the pathological diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions. Due to its high diagnostic yield and low complication rate, EUS-guided tissue acquisition has surpassed percutaneous sampling techniques. For many years, EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) was traditionally used to obtain cytological aspirates of solid pancreatic lesions, with sensitivity values ranging from 80 to 90% for the diagnosis of malignancy. Nevertheless, despite numerous technical advances, EUS-FNA still presents some limitations. Therefore, EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) has been introduced to provide tissue core biopsies, allowing histological assessment. A newly developed generation of FNB needles has demonstrated an outstanding diagnostic accuracy of over 95% for solid pancreatic lesions and provides samples appropriate for ancillary testing, such as immunohistochemistry and tumour molecular profiling. As a result, EUS-FNB is rapidly replacing EUS-FNA and is now the recommended technique for EUS-guided tissue acquisition in pancreatic cancer. Furthermore, with the recent expansion of neoadjuvant treatment criteria and with the advent of novel and personalised anti-cancer therapies, EUS-FNB is gaining a pivotal role in pancreatic cancer management and might soon be generalised to all patients, independent of disease stage. In this article, the authors present an updated review of the role of EUS-guided tissue acquisition in pancreatic cancer. Current indications, several technical aspects and new applications of EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB are discussed.

Intermittent endoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions. Pilot study

Background and purpose of the study: endoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is the method of choice for sampling pancreatic solid lesions. However, there is significant heterogeneity in terms of the technique used. Intermittent aspiration has not been evaluated in pancreatic solid lesions and could improve the diagnostic performance.

METHODS

Single-blind, non-inferiority pilot study. Patients with solid pancreatic lesions and indication for EUS-FNA were prospectively included. Patients were randomly assigned to intermittent (IS) or continuous (CS) suction techniques. Diagnostic performance, cellularity, blood contamination and number of passes required to reach diagnosis were evaluated.

MAIN RESULTS

33 patients were assigned to CS (16 patients) or IS (17 patients). Diagnostic performance was 87.5% for CS and 94.1% for IS (OR 2.29, 95%CI 0.19-27.99, p = 0.51). In the IS group samples had higher cellularity (OR 1.83, 95%CI 0.48-6.91, p = 0.37) and lower blood contamination (OR 0.38, 95%CI 0.09-1.54, p = 0.18). The number of passes required to reach diagnosis was 2.12 for CS and 1.94 for IS (p = 0.64). Liquid cytology was obtained in 73.3% of IS and 61.5% of CS (OR 1.72, 95%CI 0.35-8.50).

CONCLUSIONS

The IS technique was not inferior to CS in terms of diagnostic accuracy in the evaluation of pancreatic solid lesions, with a tendency to obtain higher cellularity, lower blood contamination and frequent presence of cell block.

Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration Versus Fine-Needle Capillary Sampling in Evaluation of Lymph Node Metastasis of Thyroid Cancer

Background

To compare the sampling adequacy and diagnostic efficiency of ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration with 22-, 25-gauge needles and capillary sampling with 22-gauge needle in the biopsy of cervical lymph node.

Methods

A total of 130 cervical lymph nodes from 103 patients were consecutively included in the prospective study. Each suspected lymph node was aspirated with a 22-gauge needle, capillary sampled with a 22-gauge needle and aspirated with a 25-gauge needle. The adequacy rates and nondiagnostic rates of obtained specimen were calculated.

Results

Of the 130 suspected lymph nodes, there were 77 lymph nodes<6.0 mm and 53 lymph nodes≥6.0mm in the smallest dimension. Both FNA_22G and FNC_22G got significantly higher sampling adequacy than FNA_25G for the total lymph nodes. For lymph nodes<6.0 mm, the sampling adequacy was significantly higher with FNA_22G than with FNA_25G for each parameter and the cumulative score (all P<0.05), while no difference were seen between FNA_22G and FNC_22G, and between FNC_22G and FNA_25G. There were higher nondiagnostic rates for FNA_25G compared with FNA_22G and FNC_22G in all lymph nodes and in each size subgroups. FNA_25G yielded more diagnostically inadequate specimens than FNA_22G and FNC_22G did in the total lymph nodes (P=0.002), in lymph nodes<6.0 mm (P=0.014), and in those ≥ 6.0 mm (P=0.000).

Conclusions

FNA_22G and FNC_22G obtained more diagnostically adequate specimens than FNA_25G in cervical lymph nodes. FNA_22G and FNC_22G may be more suitable than FNA_25G in diagnosing cervical lymph nodes. FNA_22G and FNC_22G may yield specimens with similar quality.

Factors influencing diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in pancreatic and biliary tumors

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is influenced by several factors, primarily operator expertise. Formal training in EUS-FNA, as suggested by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines, is not always available and is often expensive and time-consuming. In this study we evaluate factors influencing the diagnostic accuracy of pancreatic EUS-FNA.

METHODS

In a retrospective study, 557 consecutive EUS-FNAs were evaluated. Several variables relating to the procedures were considered to calculate the EUS-FNA performance over eight years.

RESULTS

A total of 308 out of 557 EUS-FNAs were selected. Overall sensitivity of EUS-FNA was 66% (95% CI: 60.8-71.8), specificity 100%, and diagnostic accuracy 69% (95% CI: 64.0-74.4). An increase in diagnostic accuracy was observed to >90% using a new fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle and in the case of simultaneous sampling of primary and metastatic lesions. Diagnostic accuracy >80% was observed after 250 procedures, in the absence of rapid on-site cytopathological examination (ROSE). Multivariate logistic regression analysis confirmed that the FNB needle, operator skill, and double EUS-FNA sampling are associated with high diagnostic accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

The learning curve for EUS-FNA may be longer and a considerable number of procedures are needed to achieve high diagnostic accuracy in the absence of ROSE. However, the use of FNB needles and the simultaneous sampling of primary and metastatic lesions can rapidly improve the diagnostic accuracy of the procedure.

Diagnosis of Pancreatic Solid Lesions, Subepithelial Lesions, and Lymph Nodes Using Endoscopic Ultrasound

Currently, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has become widely accepted and has considerable advantages over computed tomography (CT) and other imaging modalities, given that it enables echostructure assessment in lesions with <1 cm diameter and permits high resolution imaging. EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) provides consistent results under ultrasound guidance and has been considered more effective compared to CT- or ultrasound-guided lesion biopsy. Moreover, complication rates, including pancreatitis and bleeding, have been extremely low, with <1% morbidity and mortality rates, thereby suggesting the exceptional overall safety of EUS-TA. The aggressive use of EUS for various lesions has been key in facilitating early diagnosis and therapy. This review summarizes the diagnostic ability of EUS for pancreatic solid lesions, subepithelial lesions, and lymph nodes where it is mainly used. EUS has played an important role in diagnosing these lesions and planning treatment strategies. Future developments in EUS imaging technology, such as producing images close to histopathological findings, are expected to further improve its diagnostic ability. Moreover, tissue acquisition via EUS is expected to be used for precision medicine, which facilitates the selection of an appropriate therapeutic agent by increasing the amount of tissue collected and improving genetic analysis.

Personalized Approach to the Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in the Diagnosis and Management of Pancreaticobiliary Malignancies

Pancreaticobiliary malignancies arise from different areas within the pancreas and biliary tree. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is a well-recognized diagnostic and therapeutic modality in the treatment of pancreaticobiliary diseases, and more specifically, pancreaticobiliary malignancies. Traditionally used for diagnostic purposes, EUS plays a critical role in tissue sampling and cancer staging. The emergence of the new field of interventional EUS has allowed EUS to also play a critical role in therapeutic management. Novel interventional EUS procedures such as EUS-guided gastrojejunostomy (EUS-GE), EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), and EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GLB) can be utilized to treat complications of pancreaticobiliary malignancies such as gastric outlet obstruction, obstructive jaundice, and cholecystitis. In addition, interventional EUS procedures can be utilized for the palliation of unresectable malignancies both for source control with EUS-radiofrequency ablation (EUS-RFA) and for the treatment of abdominal pain refractory to opioid medications with EUS-guided celiac axis neurolysis. However, patient selection remains a critical component in both diagnostic and therapeutic interventions and must be tailored to individual patient wishes, disease pathology, and overall prognosis.

Effectiveness of introducing a 20-gauge core biopsy needle with a core trap in EUS-FNA/B for diagnosing pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration/biopsy (EUS-FNA/B) is a standard method for pathological diagnosis of pancreatic solid lesions. The EchoTip ProCore 20G® (PC20), a 20-gauge biopsy needle with a forward-bevel core trap, has been available in Japan since 2015.

METHODS

We compared the efficacy of the PC20 with that of the EchoTip ProCore 22G® (PC22) and Acquire 22G® (AC22) in EUS-FNA/B for diagnosing pancreatic cancer. This retrospective study included 191 patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent EUS-FNA/B using the PC20, PC22, or AC22 at our facility from April 2013 to October 2019. We investigated the patients' clinical characteristics and the diagnostic accuracy and safety of each needle.

RESULTS

A sufficient stroke length of puncture was secured in all patients. The maximum length under EUS was shorter with the AC22 (22.1 ± 2.2 mm) than PC20 (30.6 ± 0.7 mm, p < 0.01) and PC22 (30.3 ± 0.8 mm, p < 0.01). The histological accuracy was 96.4% with the PC20 but only 58.8% with the PC22 (adjusted p (p-adj) < 0.0001) and 75.0% with the AC22 (p-adj = 0.06). The diagnostic accuracy of the combination of histology and cytology was 96.4% with the PC20, while it was 72.1% with the PC22 (p-adj < 0.0001) and 91.7% with the AC22 (p-adj > 0.99). One patient (0.9%) in the PC20 group developed mild pancreatitis, but no adverse events occurred with the other needles.

CONCLUSIONS

The PC20 showed better diagnostic capability than the PC22. The diagnostic efficacy was similar between the PC20 and AC22. The high histological accuracy of the PC20 could be advantageous for lesions in which histological assessment is critical.

The Diagnosis of Autoimmune Pancreatitis Using Endoscopic Ultrasonography

Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is characterized by enlargement of the pancreas and irregular narrowing of the main pancreatic duct. It is often associated with IgG4-related sclerosing cholangitis (IgG4-SC), in which the bile duct narrows. Although characteristic irregular narrowing of the pancreatic duct caused by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography is noted in AIP, it is difficult to differentiate between localized AIP and pancreatic carcinoma based on imaging of the pancreatic duct. While stenosis of the bile duct in IgG4-SC is characterized by longer-length stenosis than in cholangiocarcinoma, differentiation based on bile duct imaging alone is challenging. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) can characterize hypoechoic enlargement of the pancreas or bile duct wall thickening in AIP and IgG4-SC, and diagnosis using elastography and contrast-enhanced EUS are being evaluated. The utility of EUS-guided fine needle aspiration for the histological diagnosis of AIP has been reported and is expected to improve diagnostic performance for AIP. Findings in the bile duct wall from endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography followed by intraductal ultrasonography are useful in differentiating IgG4-SC from cholangiocarcinoma. Diagnoses based on endoscopic ultrasonography play a central role in the diagnosis of AIP.

Histological diagnosis and grading of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy using a 25-gauge needle with a core trap: A multicenter prospective trial

OBJECTIVES

Preoperative grading of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNET) is challenging. The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the use of a 25-gauge needle with a core trap for diagnosis and grading of PanNET.

METHODS

This multicenter prospective trial was registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN000021409). Consecutive patients with suspected PanNET between June 2016 and November 2017 were enrolled. All patients underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) using a 25-gauge needle with a core trap. Samples obtained after the first needle pass were used for central pathological review. EUS-FNB was evaluated in terms of (i) technical success rate, (ii) adequacy for histological evaluation, (iii) complication rate during the procedure, and (iv) concordance between PanNET grading on EUS-FNB and that after analysis of the resected tumor.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients were enrolled. Of the 36/52 patients who underwent surgical resection, 31 were finally diagnosed with PanNET and were eligible for analysis. The technical success rate of EUS-FNB was 100%. The rate of adequacy for histological evaluation was 90.3%. There were no complications related to EUS-FNB. The concordance rate between PanNET grading on EUS-FNB and that after analysis of the resected tumor was 82.6% (95% confidence interval = 61.22-95.05, P = 0.579).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-FNB using a 25-gauge needle with a core trap is feasible, providing histological samples are of sufficient quality for diagnosis and grading of PanNET.

Sarcoidosis with Splenic Involvement Diagnosed with Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine-needle Aspiration

Splenic sarcoidosis is often diagnosed by splenectomy or an ultrasound-guided splenic biopsy. However, splenectomy is invasive and costly, and a percutaneous biopsy is sometimes difficult. We herein report a case of splenic sarcoidosis diagnosed with endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). A 71-year-old man was referred to our hospital for abnormal shadows on a chest roentgenogram. Computed tomography showed multiple lesions in the spleen and pulmonary consolidations. Bronchoscopy revealed no definitive diagnosis. We therefore performed EUS-FNA for a splenic lesion that led to the diagnosis. This case suggests that EUS-FNA is useful in confirming the diagnosis of sarcoidosis with suspected splenic lesions.

Current status of newer generation endoscopic ultrasound core needles in the diagnostic evaluation of gastrointestinal lesions

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition is now an imperative technique for the diagnosis of multiple diseases in the gastrointestinal tract and nearby structures. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and fine needle biopsy via dedicated FNB needles (EUS-FNB) are two standard-essential tools for tissue acquisition. The choice of needle type is an important factor determining appropriate tissue acquisition. Multiple studies have compared EUS-FNA versus EUS-FNB on different lesions also there are several studies evaluated different needles in terms of sampling adequacy and cytological and histological accuracy. Prior studies comparing prior-generation FNB needles to FNA did not show an increased diagnostic yield with FNB. However, the newer-generation needles have demonstrated enhanced performance compared with their predecessors. As they may provide a large amount of tissue for the cytological and histological evaluation, rapid onsite specimen evaluation (ROSE), and immunohistochemical and molecular analyses, which may be very important for targeted therapy. In this review, we discuss current evidence and literature on the use of the newer generation needles for pancreatic and non-pancreatic lesions.

Current Status of Needles in the Optimization of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Procedures

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is among the most important tools for the evaluation of gastrointestinal tumors and affected areas around the gastrointestinal tract. It enables the acquisition of material from abnormal lesions via the gastrointestinal wall for tissue confirmation via endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). EUS-FNA has played a vital role in oncological care and has become the standard method for tissue sampling. The choice of needle type is an important factor determining tissue acquisition and has been evaluated by many researchers. New needles are introduced into the market almost every year, and opinions vary regarding proper needle selection. While there are diverse opinions but no definitive recommendations about the use of one particular device, fine-needle biopsy needles may provide detailed information on a tissue’s architecture based on greater sample yields. This permits additional analyses, including genetic sequencing and phenotyping, thereby enabling the provision of more personalized treatment plans. Furthermore, other EUS-guided procedures have been developed, including interventional EUS and through-the-needle devices. Given the continued attempts to improve the diagnostic ability and therapeutic techniques, we review in detail the available types of puncture needles to provide guidance on the selection of the appropriate needle types.

EUS-FNA, ancillary studies and their clinical utility in patients with mediastinal, pancreatic, and other abdominal lesions

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is an important modality to obtain tissue diagnosis from mediastinal, pancreatic, and intra-abdominal lesions in close proximity to the pulmonary and gastrointestinal tract. It is considered to be a relatively safe, rapid, and minimally invasive technique with low complication rates.

AIMS

To determine the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and outcome of EUS-FNA, with histological correlation where applicable.

METHODS

Data of all 1059 consecutive patients who underwent EUS-FNA from 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2017 at Shaukat Khanum Memorial Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Lahore was reviewed in this retrospective study. The major sites that were targeted for EUS-FNA were pancreatic (423), mediastinal (376), and other abdominal lesions (260).

RESULTS

The average number of passes per patient was 2.22. Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) was adequate in 969 patients (91.4%). Concordance between ROSE and final cytology was 99.5%. Follow-up was available in 810 patients (76.4%). The overall diagnostic yield was 94.3%. Ancillary studies, including immunohistochemical stains and flow cytometry, helped to increase the diagnostic yield from 78.1% to 94.3%. The overall sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and diagnostic accuracy for EUS-FNA were 94.8%, 98.6%, 99.9%, 65.5%, and 95.1%, respectively. Seven of 1059 patients (0.6%) developed complications.

CONCLUSION

EUS-FNA is a very sensitive and specific diagnostic tool with a minimal complication rate. Ancillary studies helped to increase the sensitivity, as well as the diagnostic yield.

Finding a needle in a haystack: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for solid pancreatic masses in the setting of chronic pancreatitis

Background:

The mainstay for the definitive diagnosis of pancreatic lesions is endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). However, there is evidence that EUS-FNA has low sensitivity in the setting of chronic pancreatitis (CP). This single-center retrospective study aimed to compare and analyze the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA for solid pancreatic lesions in the presence and absence of CP, and to further investigate strategies for overcoming the low diagnostic yield in the setting of CP.

Methods:

This study identified patients who underwent EUS-FNA at Sanford USD Medical Center (SD, USA) for a solid pancreatic lesion between July 15, 2011, and November 30, 2017. Data on demographics, clinical features, cross-sectional imaging findings, EUS findings, cytology/pathology, and clinical follow up were collected.

Results:

The final diagnosis was adenocarcinoma in 156 patients (67%), neuroendocrine tumor in 27 (12%), lymphoma in 6 (3%), metastatic malignancy in 8 (4%), and benign etiologies in 35 (15%). CP was identified in 44/234 (19%) patients. The overall diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy for EUS-FNA were 92.9%, 97.1%, 99.5%, 70.8%, and 93.5%, respectively. The sensitivity (80% vs. 95%, P=0.020) and accuracy (86% vs. 95%, P=0.043) were significantly lower in patients with CP compared to those without CP.

Conclusion:

CP can significantly affect the EUS-FNA diagnostic yield of solid pancreatic neoplasms. A high index of clinical suspicion is required in these cases to make a definitive diagnosis.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Biopsy Using 22-Gauge Franseen Needle for the Histological Diagnosis of Solid Lesions: A Multicenter Prospective Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

Recently, a novel 22-gauge needle with three symmetric needle points and crown-shaped cutting heels, known as a Franseen needle, has been developed for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB).

AIM

To assess the histological material acquisition rate and histological diagnostic capability of the 22-gauge Franseen needle (AC22) during EUS-FNB for solid lesions.

METHODS

This study was designed as an open-label, multicenter, prospective, single-arm pilot study of EUS-FNB using AC22 for the diagnosis of solid lesions. Three passes of FNB using AC22 were performed for all lesions. The primary endpoints were the histological material acquisition rate and histological diagnostic capability. The secondary endpoints were the technical success rate, quality of histological samples, number of passes for diagnosis, and safety.

RESULTS

Between September 2017 and May 2018, 75 patients were enrolled. The final diagnoses were malignancy in 65 and benign in 10. Three passes of FNB were technically successful in all patients. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for the malignancy of histological analyses were 92.3% (60/65), 100% (10/10), and 93.3% (70/75), respectively, for the first pass and 95.4% (62/65), 100% (10/10), and 96% (72/75), respectively, for combined three passes. The diagnostic yield plateaued after the second pass. Sufficient tissue samples for histological interpretation were obtained in 96% (72/75) and 100% (75/75) patients for the single pass and combined three passes, respectively. Two patients (2.7%) developed mild pancreatitis as an adverse event.

CONCLUSION

EUS-FNB using AC22 showed high histological diagnostic capability with the high first pass yield.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY

UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN ID: UMIN000036641).

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue sampling of pancreatic lesions

Important advancements in endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue sampling techniques and development of new needle designs have improved the diagnostic yield of pancreatic lesions. This innovation in endoscopic ultrasound has also opened the door for early diagnosis and precision therapy in the management of cancer patients. Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle biopsy is an invaluable tool and newer biopsy designs will probably play a pivotal role in the management of pancreatic lesions in the next future. Aim of the current review was to provide an overview on the available techniques and devices for the endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of pancreatic solid and cystic lesions.

Does endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy using a Franseen needle really offer high diagnostic accuracy? A propensity-matched analysis

Background and study aims  This study aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy and utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) performed using a Franseen needle on solid pancreatic lesions. Patients and methods  This study included 132 consecutive lesions sampled by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) using a 22-G conventional needle and 95 consecutive lesions evaluated by EUS-FNB using a 22-G Franseen needle to evaluate solid pancreatic lesions at our medical center between July 2013 and November 2018. We used propensity-matched analysis with adjustment for confounders. Patient data were analyzed retrospectively. Results  Diagnostic accuracy was higher in the Franseen needle group (Group F; 91.6 %, 87 /95) than in the conventional needle group (Group C; 86.3 %, 82 /95), showing no significant difference ( P  = 0.36). In Group F, diagnostic accuracies for pancreatic head lesions and lesions sampled by transduodenal puncture were 98.0 % (48/49) and 97.9 % (46/47), respectively. These values were significantly higher than values in Group C ( P  = 0.013, 0.01). Group F displayed a significantly lower number of punctures. In terms of differentiating benign from malignant lesions, Group C showed 85.1 % sensitivity (74/87), 100 % specificity (8/8), 100 % positive predictive value (74/74), and 38.1 % negative predictive value (8/21), compared to values of 90.1 % (73/81), 100 % (14/14), 100 % (73/73), and 63.6 % (14/22), respectively, in Group F. Sensitivity and negative predictive value were better in Group F. Conclusions  Franseen needles for EUS-FNB of solid pancreatic lesions offer similar puncture performance at different lesion sites while requiring fewer punctures than conventional needles.