Comparison between modified wet suction and dry suction technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy in pancreatic solid lesions

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.

Dry Suction Versus Wet Suction of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy for Diagnosis of Solid Pancreatic Lesions: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Noninferiority Trial

INTRODUCTION

Conclusions regarding the suction techniques of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) remain controversial. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the dry suction vs wet suction technique in solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs) and determine the optimal number of passes for EUS-FNB.

METHODS

This investigation was conducted as a multicenter, randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial. Patients with SPLs were randomly allocated to receive either the dry or wet suction technique. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy. The secondary outcomes included sensitivity, specificity, optimal number of needle passes, specimen quality, procedure time, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Of the 200 patients, 193 were included in the final analysis, with 96 in the dry suction group and 97 in the wet suction group. The diagnostic accuracies were 97.92% and 96.91% in the dry and wet groups, respectively, with a 1.01% difference between the study groups (2-sided 95% CI, -3.47% to 5.48%, P = 0.659). The overall adverse event rate was 2.6%. No significant differences were observed in sample adequacy (98.9% vs 98.9%, P = 1) or blood contamination ( P = 0.796). Regarding procedure time, there was no statistical difference (18.68 ± 8.03 minutes vs 19.36 ± 8.89 minutes, P = 0.626); however, more procedural steps were required in the wet suction technique. No significant difference was found between the cumulative diagnostic accuracy of each needle (first pass 93.78% vs second pass 95.34% vs third pass 97.41%, P = 0.225).

DISCUSSION

The dry suction technique is noninferior to the wet suction technique for EUS-FNB in SPLs. In the absence of rapid on-site evaluation, only one pass was required to achieve more than 90% diagnostic accuracy ( ClinicalTrial.gov number NCT05549856).

Personalized prediction of anticancer potential of non-oncology drugs through learning from genome derived molecular pathways

Advances in cancer genomics have significantly expanded our understanding of cancer biology. However, the high cost of drug development limits our ability to translate this knowledge into precise treatments. Approved non-oncology drugs, comprising a large repository of chemical entities, offer a promising avenue for repurposing in cancer therapy. Herein we present CHANCE, a supervised machine learning model designed to predict the anticancer activities of non-oncology drugs for specific patients by simultaneously considering personalized coding and non-coding mutations. Utilizing protein-protein interaction networks, CHANCE harmonizes multilevel mutation annotations and integrates pharmacological information across different drugs into a single model. We systematically benchmarked the performance of CHANCE and show its predictions are better than previous model and highly interpretable. Applying CHANCE to approximately 5000 cancer samples indicated that >30% might respond to at least one non-oncology drug, with 11% non-oncology drugs predicted to have anticancer activities. Moreover, CHANCE predictions suggested an association between SMAD7 mutations and aspirin treatment response. Experimental validation using tumor cells derived from seven patients with pancreatic or esophageal cancer confirmed the potential anticancer activity of at least one non-oncology drug for five of these patients. To summarize, CHANCE offers a personalized and interpretable approach, serving as a valuable tool for mining non-oncology drugs in the precision oncology era.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

DISCUSSION

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

TRIAL REGISTRATION

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

Comparison of suction techniques for EUS-guided tissue acquisition: Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background and study aims Despite the widespread use of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition, the choice of optimal suction technique remains a subject of debate. Multiple studies have shown conflicting results with respect to the four suction techniques: Dry suction (DS), no suction (NS), stylet slow-pull (SSP) and wet suction (WS). Thus, the present network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to compare the diagnostic yields of above suction techniques during EUS-guided tissue acquisition. Methods A comprehensive literature search from 2010 to March 2022 was done for randomized trials comparing the aspirated sample and diagnostic outcome with various suction techniques. Both pairwise and network meta-analyses were performed to analyze the outcomes: sample adequacy, moderate to high cellularity, gross bloodiness and diagnostic accuracy. Results A total of 16 studies (n=2048 patients) were included in the final NMA. WS was associated with a lower odd of gross bloodiness compared to DS (odds ratio 0.50, 95% confidence interval 0.24-0.97). There was no significant difference between the various suction methods with respect to sample adequacy, moderate to high cellularity and diagnostic accuracy. On meta-regression, to adjust for the effect of needle type, WS was comparable to DS in terms of bloodiness when adjusted for fine-needle aspiration needle. Surface under the cumulative ranking analysis ranked WS as the best modality for all the outcomes. Conclusions The present NMA did not show superiority of any specific suction technique for EUS-guided tissue sampling with regard to sample quality or diagnostic accuracy, with low confidence in estimates.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

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

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

The Wet Suction Technique Enhances the Diagnostic Efficacy and Aspirate Quality of EUS-FNA for Solid Lesions: A Multicenter Retrospective Study in China

GOALS

To comprehensively compare the wet suction technique with the conventional dry suction technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in solid lesions.

BACKGROUND

Optimal suction techniques for EUS-FNA remain uncertain when approaching solid lesions.

STUDY

We performed a retrospective study of EUS-FNA at 3 medical centers in China. A total of 203 patients were enrolled who received 2 passes of EUS-FNA with 22-G needles. If the first pass underwent dry suction, the second pass was wet suction. Otherwise, the order of suction technique is opposite. Diagnostic accuracy, sample quality (including cellularity and blood contamination), and sample quantity (including specimen adequacy, the maximum intact specimen length, and the total specimen length) were compared between wet-suction and dry-suction techniques.

RESULTS

The patients included 143 pancreatic lesions and 60 nonpancreatic lesions. Compared with the dry suction technique, the wet suction technique yielded a significantly higher diagnostic accuracy (85.22% vs. 72.41%, P =0.002), better specimen adequacy score and cellularity score ( P <0.0001), and lower blood contamination score ( P <0.0001). In the subgroup analysis, wet suction provided significantly higher diagnostic accuracy in pancreatic cancer without chronic pancreatitis ( P <0.05), and better cellularity score and specimen adequacy score, lower blood contamination score, and longer maximum intact specimen length and total specimen length in various lesions than that in dry suction.

CONCLUSIONS

The wet suction technique resulted in significantly higher diagnostic accuracy in pancreatic cancer without chronic pancreatitis, and better cellularity and histologic specimen in most of solid lesions.

Preclinical models derived from endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition for individualized treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive malignancy with poor outcomes. Although the management strategies have evolved in recent years, the PDAC 5-year survival rate remains at only 9%; it may become the second leading cause of cancer death in the USA by 2030. Only 15-20% of PDAC patients are eligible to undergo surgery; diagnostic biopsies and individualized treatment present a more significant challenge for the remaining group. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) has been widely used in the diagnosis of pancreatic masses. With the advancement of this sampling technique, adequate specimens can be obtained from all patients with PDAC in both early and late clinical stages. Recent data suggest that the specimens obtained from EUS-TA might be used to establish viable preclinical models, which conserve the genetic mutation and preserve the heterogeneity of the original tumors. Additionally, any drug sensitivity evident in the EUS-TA-derived preclinical models might predict the clinical response, thus guiding the prospective therapeutic selection. As we move toward the era of precision medicine, this review provides an update on the role of EUS-TA as a method for obtaining genetic material used in preclinical models that can assess and stratify individuals according to their individual cancer biology.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy: needle types and suction methods

Video 1Tools and techniques: understanding EUS-guided liver biopsy needle types and tissue acquisition techniques.