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

CA19-9/DBil: a promising indicator to distinguish between CA19-9-elevated pancreatic head-type autoimmune pancreatitis and pancreatic head cancer

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic head-type autoimmune pancreatitis (PH-AIP) with elevated CA19-9 is sometimes difficult to distinguish from pancreatic head cancer (PHC) with elevated CA19-9. At times, IgG4 proves inadequate in offering assistance. The study aimed to elucidate the performance of CA19-9/DBil in distinguishing between the two conditions.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study. We collected serologic indicators from participants in PH-AIP and PHC Group. Three logistic regression equations were established ranging from non-adjustment (Model 1, only CA19-9/DBil included) to adjusting for sex, age, and CEA (Model 2 and Model 3) to explore the relationship between CA19-9/DBil and PH-AIP probability. ROC, Decision Curve Analysis (DCA), calibration curve were conducted. P for AUCs and net reclassification improvements (NRI) were computed to evaluate differences in discrimination and the improvement in risk reclassification between models.

RESULTS

The study included 90 PHC and 35 PH-AIP patients, all with elevated CA19-9. The ORs for CA19-9/DBil in three models were similar (0.915 to 0.921). ROC revealed that Model 1 had an AUC of 0.772. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy at the best threshold were all > 0.7. Model 1, although simple, was not inferior in its discriminative ability compared to complex models: the difference in discrimination between Model 1 and each of two adjusted models was not statistically significant (P > 0.05, both AUC and NRI). Additionally, calibration curve and DCA suggested that Model 1 had good calibration and clinical utility.

CONCLUSIONS

CA19-9/DBil exhibited promising diagnostic performance in differentiating between CA19-9-elevated PH-AIP and PHC.

Endoscopic diagnosis of immunoglobulin G4-related sclerosing cholangitis

Immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4)-related sclerosing cholangitis (IgG4-SC) is a distinct form of sclerosing cholangitis frequently associated with autoimmune pancreatitis and is recognized as a biliary manifestation of IgG4-related disease. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) are key diagnostic modalities for IgG4-SC. Cholangiocarcinoma and primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC) are significant mimickers of IgG4-SC. ERCP is employed to evaluate narrowing of the bile duct, with cholangiograms of IgG4-SC classified into four types. This cholangiographic classification is crucial for differential diagnosis. Characteristic cholangiographic findings of IgG4-SC include diffuse or segmental strictures of the intrahepatic or extrahepatic bile ducts and intrahepatic strictures associated with autoimmune pancreatitis. ERCP is particularly useful for differentiating IgG4-SC from PSC because their cholangiographic features differ. EUS and intraductal ultrasonography (IDUS) are used to assess thickening of the bile duct wall. Characteristic IDUS findings in IgG4-SC include circular and symmetrical wall thickening, smooth outer and inner margins, and homogeneous internal echoes at stricture sites. Additionally, bile duct wall thickening at nonstricture sites is a typical IDUS feature of IgG4-SC. Bile duct biopsy is used to evaluate pathological findings, although its diagnostic yield for IgG4-SC is limited; its primary role is to exclude malignant biliary strictures. Duodenal papilla biopsy serves as a supplementary diagnostic tool for IgG4-SC. EUS and tissue acquisition also aid in diagnosing autoimmune pancreatitis as part of other organ involvement. Thus, endoscopic techniques play critical roles in the diagnosis of IgG4-SC.

The Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound and Ancillary Techniques in the Diagnosis of Autoimmune Pancreatitis: A Comprehensive Review

Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is a unique form of chronic pancreatitis with a multifactorial pathogenesis. Historically, it has been classified as type 1 and type 2, according to its clinical and histological features. The diagnosis of AIP is challenging and relies on a combination of clinical, histopathologic, serologic, and imaging characteristics. In the available guidelines, the imaging hallmarks of AIP are based on cross-sectional imaging and cholangiopancreatography retrograde endoscopic findings. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is generally used for pancreatic tissue acquisition to rule out pancreatic cancer and diagnose AIP with limited accuracy. Several papers reported the reliability of EUS for providing informative morphologic features of AIP. Nowadays, the improvement in the resolution of EUS conventional images and the development of new ancillary technologies have further increased the diagnostic yield of EUS: contrast-enhanced EUS and EUS elastography are non-invasive and real-time techniques that strongly support the diagnosis and management of pancreatic diseases. In this review article, we will present the role of conventional EUS and ancillary diagnostic techniques in the diagnosis of AIP to support clinicians and endosonographers in managing this condition.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for pancreatic cystic lesions: a comprehensive review

Advancements in diagnostic radiology have amplified the incorporation of these techniques into routine clinical practice. Concurrently, the frequency of incidentally identifying pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) has surged. PCLs encompass diverse categories contingent upon their origin. Among them, branch duct-intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (BD-IPMN) and mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCN) are categorized as mucinous cystic lesions that have malignant potential. Even solid neoplasms occasionally show cystic degeneration. Therefore, precise differential PCL diagnosis is crucial to optimize clinical management strategies and detect malignant transformations. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) affords comprehensive visualization of the pancreas with high-resolution ultrasound, complemented by fine-needle aspiration (FNA) under real-time EUS guidance, which is a minimally invasive procedure for obtaining pathological samples. This synergy has established EUS and EUS-FNA as vital procedures in the management of PCLs, enabling differentiation of PCLs. Cyst fluid analysis has played a pivotal role in deciding the optimal management strategy. The efficacy of cytological analysis is limited by scant cytologic material. The "string sign" test evaluates fluid viscosity, and its simplicity warrants initial consideration. Amylase and tumor markers, such as CEA, have been studied, but they yield varied sensitivity and specificity. Glucose and genetic mutations (KRAS, GNAS) exhibit promise, while comprehensive genomic profiling underscores genetic insights. Through-the-needle biopsy and needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy also show high diagnostic yield. EUS-FNA, however, entails risks like infection and needle tract seeding, emphasizing the need for proper utilization. Pancreatic cyst fluid analysis augments diagnostic accuracy and informs clinical decisions, making it a valuable adjunct to imaging.

The history of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration: development and progress

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is an important diagnostic technique to accurately diagnose diseases originating from organs near the gastrointestinal tract. EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) has improved the histopathological diagnosis. EUS-FNA has been further developed over a long period of 40 years. The history of the development of endosonographic scopes, ultrasonographic observation systems, puncture needles, and puncture methods will provide a springboard for future development.

Biopsy diagnosis of type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis: Does it bring a conclusion or confusion?

A biopsy-based diagnosis of type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is now feasible via an endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy, but there are potential issues to address. The benefits of acquiring large tissue samples include more successful immunostaining for Immunoglobulin G4 and more identifications of storiform fibrosis, obliterative phlebitis, and the ductal lesions of type 1 AIP. However, storiform fibrosis may not be present in all the type 1 AIP lesions. An interobserver agreement study revealed only slight-to-moderate agreement among pathologists diagnosing the histological findings of type 1 AIP. Potential reasons for disagreement are the different time phases of the inflammation (which result in heterogeneous histological pictures), a focal appearance of the typical histological findings, and the different definitions used by pathologists. We have thus devised guidance for diagnosing type 1 AIP based on biopsy tissues. In this guidance, we define each histological finding of type 1 AIP, for example, storiform fibrosis as a swirling arrangement of inflammatory cells, spindle-shaped cells, and delicate collagens as a unit. The necessity of elastic stains for identifying obliterative phlebitis is explained, with examples of mimickers. Another important purpose of a biopsy in type 1 AIP cases is differentiation from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). In this situation, acinar-ductal metaplasia observed in type 1 AIP is a mimicker of PDAC and should not be confused. For the resolution of potential disagreements among pathologists, a multi-disciplinary approach with the collaboration of clinicians, radiologists, and pathologists is necessary to avoid confusion.