Endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle biopsy vs fine-needle aspiration for lymph nodes tissue acquisition: a systematic review and meta-analysis

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.

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.

Current perspectives on the diversification of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and biopsy

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) has undergone significant advancements since it was first reported in 1992. Initially focused on the pancreas, EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) has now been extended to encompass all organs proximal to the gastrointestinal system. Recently, a novel fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle with an end-cut tip was developed, allowing for the collection of specimens suitable for histological assessment, a feat hard to achieve with traditional needles. The FNB needle holds promise for applications in immunohistochemistry staining and genetics evaluation, and it has the potential to yield specimens of comparable quality to core needle biopsy during percutaneous puncture, especially for lesions beyond the pancreas, such as lymph nodes. This review focuses on the efficacy of EUS-FNA/FNB for extended target regions, specifically lymph nodes, spleen, adrenal gland, and ascites. The indications for EUS-FNA have greatly expanded beyond the pancreas over the years, and future improvements and innovations in puncture needles will allow for the collection of higher-quality specimens, which is expected to play a significant part in personalized cancer treatment.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy using a three-prong asymmetry tip needle for pancreatic tumors and peridigestive tract lesions: Retrospective single-center study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition is vital for diagnosing pancreatic and peridigestive tract lesions. A new three-prong asymmetry tip needle has been developed for this procedure. In this study, we retrospectively assessed the diagnostic ability, tissue collection volume, and procedural adverse events of the three-prong asymmetry tip needle for solid pancreatic, subepithelial, and other organ lesions.

METHODS

We analyzed the data of 58 consecutive patients who underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition using a three-prong asymmetry tip needle between August 2022 and April 2023 at a single care center.

RESULTS

The tissue collection rate was 91.4% with 89.7% accuracy, 89.3% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 100% positive predictive value, and 25% negative predictive value. No significant differences in collection rates or diagnostic performance were observed based on the target organ, puncture route, or lesion size. Using our original assessment method, the average histological core tissue score was 3.1 ± 0.8, whereas the blood contamination volume was 2.5 ± 0.8. Only one of 58 patients (1.7%) developed a pancreatic fistula of moderate severity as an adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

The three-prong asymmetry tip needle demonstrated good diagnostic capability and adequate sample volume with safety for pancreatic, subepithelial, and other organ lesions.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Biopsy in the Diagnostic Work-Up of Deep-Seated Lymphadenopathies and Spleen Lesions: A Monocentric Experience

EUS-FNB has been introduced in clinical practice as a less invasive diagnostic approach with respect to surgery. We performed a single-center retrospective study on the diagnostic efficacy of EUS-guided FNB, including 171 patients with lymph nodes, splenic, and extranodal lesions that underwent EUS for FNB at our institution. Excluding 12 patients who did not undergo FNB and 25 patients with a previous diagnosis of a solid tumor, we included 134 patients with clinical/radiological suspect of a lymphoproliferative disease, including 20 patients with a previous history of lymphoma. Out of the 134 biopsies, material of diagnostic quality was obtained in 111 procedures (84.3%). Histological examination of the EUS-FNB samples produced an actionable diagnosis in 100 cases (74.6%). Among the patients without an actionable diagnosis, a second, different diagnostic procedure produced a further eight diagnoses of lymphoma. Therefore, the sensitivity of EUS-FNB for diagnosing lymphomas was calculated to be 86.4% (51/59). Assignment of lymphomas to WHO classification subtypes was possible in 47/51 (92%) of the cases. In conclusion, EUS-FNB is an effective procedure for the histological characterization of lesions that are suspected to be lymphoproliferative disease, allowing for an actionable diagnosis in 75% of cases.

Diagnostic accuracy and safety of EUS-guided end-cutting fine-needle biopsy needles for tissue sampling of abdominal and mediastinal lymphadenopathies: a prospective multicenter series

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The role of the newer EUS fine-needle biopsy needles in lymphadenopathies (LAs) is still under evaluation. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and adverse event rate of EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling (EUS-FNB) in diagnosing LAs.

METHODS

From June 2015 to June 2022, all patients referred to 4 institutions for EUS-FNB of mediastinal and abdominal LAs were enrolled. Twenty-two-gauge Franseen tip or 25-gauge fork-tip needles were used. The criterion standard for positive results was surgery or imaging and clinical evolution over a follow-up of at least 1 year.

RESULTS

One hundred consecutive patients were enrolled, consisting of those with a new diagnosis of LA (40%), presence of LA with a previous history of neoplasia (51%), or suspected lymphoproliferative disease (9%). EUS-FNB was technically feasible in all LA patients with 2 to 3 passes (mean, 2.62 ± .93). The overall sensitivity, positive predictive value, specificity, negative predictive value, and accuracy for EUS-FNB were 96.20%, 100%, 100%, 87.50%, and 97.00%, respectively. Histologic analysis was feasible in 89% of cases. Cytologic evaluation was performed in 67% of specimens. A statistical difference between the accuracy of the 22-gauge or 25-gauge needle (P = .63) was not found. A subanalysis on lymphoproliferative disease revealed a sensitivity and accuracy of 89.29% and 90.0%, respectively. No adverse events were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-FNB with new end-cutting needles is a valuable and safe method to diagnose LAs. The high quality of histologic cores and the good amount of tissue allowed a complete immunohistochemical analysis of metastatic LAs and precise subtyping of the lymphomas. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02855151.).

Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) Guided Elastography

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is an essential technique for the management of several diseases. Over the years, new technologies have been developed to improve and overcome certain limitations related to EUS-guided tissue acquisition. Among these new methods, EUS-guided elastography, which is a real-time method for the evaluation of tissue stiffness, has arisen as one of the most widely recognized and available. At present, there are available two different systems to perform an elastographic evaluation: strain elastography and shear wave elastography. Strain elastography is based on the knowledge that certain diseases lead to a change in tissue hardness while shear wave elastography monitored shear-wave propagation and measures its velocity. EUS-guided elastography has shown in several studies high accuracy in differentiating benign from malignant lesions from many different locations, mostly in the pancreas and lymph nodes. Therefore, nowadays, there are well-established indications for this technology, mainly for supporting the management of pancreatic diseases (diagnosis of chronic pancreatitis and differential diagnosis of solid pancreatic tumors) and characterization of different diseases. However, there are more data on new potential indications for the near future. In this review, we will present the theoretical bases of this technology and we will discuss the scientific evidence to support its use.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition beyond the pancreas

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) offers the ability to obtain tissue material via a fine needle under direct visualization for cytological or pathological examination. Prior studies have looked at EUS tissue acquisition; however, most reports have been centered around lesions of the pancreas. This paper aims to review the literature on EUS tissue acquisition in other organs (beyond the pancreas) such as the liver, biliary tree, lymph nodes, and upper and lower gastrointestinal tracts. Furthermore, techniques for obtaining tissue samples under EUS guidance continue to evolve. Specifically, some of the techniques that endoscopists employ are suction techniques (i.e., dry heparin, dry suction technique, wet suction technique), the slow pull technique, and the fanning technique. Apart from acquisition techniques, the type and size of the needle utilized play a major role in the quality of samples. This review describes the indications for tissue acquisition for each organ, and also describes and compares the various tissue acquisition techniques, as well as the different needles used according to their shape and size.