Does ProCore Fine-Needle Biopsy Really Improve the Clinical Outcome of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Sampling of Pancreatic Masses?

Improvements and future perspective in diagnostic tools for neuroendocrine neoplasms

INTRODUCTION

Neuroendocrine neoplasms (NENs) represent a complex group of tumors arising from neuroendocrine cells, characterized by heterogeneous behavior and challenging diagnostics. Despite advancements in medical technology, NENs present a major challenge in early detection, often leading to delayed diagnosis and variable outcomes. This review aims to provide an in-depth analysis of current diagnostic methods as well as the evolving and future directions of diagnostic strategies for NENs.

AREA COVERED

The review extensively covers the evolution of diagnostic tools for NENs, from traditional imaging and biochemical tests to advanced genomic profiling and next-generation sequencing. The emerging role of technologies such as artificial intelligence, machine learning, and liquid biopsies could improve diagnostic precision, as could the integration of imaging modalities such as positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) hybrids and innovative radiotracers.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite progress, there is still a significant gap in the early diagnosis of NENs. Bridging this diagnostic gap and integrating advanced technologies and precision medicine are crucial to improving patient outcomes. However, challenges such as low clinical awareness, limited possibility of noninvasive diagnostic tools and funding limitations for rare diseases like NENs are acknowledged.

Contrast-enhanced guided endoscopic ultrasound procedures

Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound (CH-EUS) can overcome the limitations of endoscopic ultrasound-guided acquisition by identifying microvessels inside inhomogeneous tumours and improving the characterization of these tumours. Despite the initial enthusiasm that oriented needle sampling under CH-EUS guidance could provide better diagnostic yield in pancreatic solid lesions, further studies did not confirm the supplementary values in cases of tissue acquisition guided by CH-EUS. This review details the knowledge based on the available data on contrast-guided procedures. The indications for CH-EUS tissue acquisition include isoechoic EUS lesions with poor visible delineation where CH-EUS can differentiate the lesion vascularisation from the surrounding parenchyma and also the mural nodules within biliopancreatic cystic lesions, which occur in select cases. Additionally, the roles of CH-EUS-guided therapy in patients whose pancreatic fluid collections or bile ducts that have an echogenic content have indications for drainage, and patients who have nonvisualized vessels that need to be highlighted via Doppler EUS are presented. Another indication is represented if there is a need for an immediate assessment of the post-radiofrequency ablation of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours, in which case CH-EUS can be used to reveal the incomplete tumour destruction.

Evaluation of fine-needle core biopsy specimens for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: Diagnostic utility and helpful histological features

AIMS

With the advent of new biopsy devices, fine-needle core biopsy specimens can be obtained from pancreas masses. This study aimed to report the histological spectrum of intrapancreatic adenocarcinoma on fine-needle core biopsy and the accuracy of sampling.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We identified 423 SharkCore™ fine-needle core biopsies taken from patients with a high clinical concern for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. For each, we recorded patient age and sex, percentage of diagnostic tissue in each sample and tumour site, size and histological findings. The cases came from 392 patients (193 men, 199 women; mean age 69 years). Median diagnostic tissue amount in the samples was 30%. Common histological findings included desmoplasia (36%), single atypical cells (44%), haphazard glandular growth pattern (68%), nuclear pleomorphism > 4:1 (39%), incomplete gland lumens (18%) and detached atypical epithelial strips (37%). Additional levels were ordered on 143 cases. Final clinical diagnoses associated with the 423 cases were adenocarcinoma (n = 343), pancreatitis (n = 22), intraductal neoplasm or other benign/low-grade process (n = 16) and unknown (n = 42, patients lost to follow-up). Of the adenocarcinoma cases, the diagnosis was established by the evaluated fine-needle core biopsy sample alone in 178, by fine-needle aspiration biopsy alone in 30, by both concurrently in 89 and by subsequent biopsy or resection in 37 cases. Among 68 cases called suspicious on fine-needle core biopsy, 78% ultimately represented adenocarcinoma.

CONCLUSIONS

Fine-needle core biopsy allows for histological diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma, using known histological parameters. Common findings include single atypical cells, desmoplasia, haphazard gland growth and nuclear pleomorphism. Cases interpreted as suspicious often represent malignancy.

Comparison of 19G FNA Versus 22G FNB Needles for Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Sampling of Subepithelial Tumors: Is Bigger Better?

OBJECTIVES

To compare the diagnostic efficiency of 19G fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and 22G fine-needle biopsy (FNB) in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling for subepithelial tumors (SETs).

METHODS

The data of patients with SETs who underwent 19G FNA or 22G FNB were reviewed retrospectively in two tertiary hospitals. Tissue cores were assessed by macroscopic on-site evaluation (MOSE). Cytological or histological diagnosis were classified as definite, suspect, or no diagnosis.

RESULTS

Seventy five patients (mean age: 55 years, 44 males) underwent 19G EUS-FNA (31) or 22G EUS-FNB (44). The overall diagnostic yield was 82.7%. The rate of definite cytological diagnoses was 9.7% (3/31) in 19G and 13.6% (6/44) in 22G group (x2  = 1.520, P = .468). In terms of MOSE, 19G needle, requiring only two punctures, achieved a higher good tissue core rate than 22G group (100.0% [31/31] versus 84.1% [37/44], x2  = 5.440, P = .020]). For histological diagnosis, the 19G group achieved higher definite rate than the 22G group, 93.6% (29/31) versus 65.9% (29/44) (x2  = 7.957, P = .019) on the first puncture, 90.3% (28/31) versus 63.6% (28/44) (x2  = 7.139, P = .028) on the second puncture, 96.8% (30/31) versus 70.5% (31/44) (x2  = 7.319, P = .026) on both the first and second punctures, and 96.8% (30/31) versus 72.7% (32/44) (x2  = 7.538, P = .023) on all three punctures.

CONCLUSIONS

The 19G EUS-FNA requires only two punctures to achieve better tissue core quality by MOSE and yields a higher rate of histological diagnosis than 22G ProCore needle for SETs. The bigger 19G FNA needle seems to play an important role in the evaluation of SETs.

Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor (Pan-NET) Presented by Abdominal Pain: A Case Report and Literature Review

A pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (Pan-NET) is a rare neoplasm originating in the neuroendocrine system. Carcinoid syndrome occurs in approximately 19% of patients with functional Pan-NETs, typically when liver metastases occur. In this paper, we describe the case of a patient with a low-grade non-functional Pan-NET, but with a typical clinical presentation of carcinoid syndrome. An 81-year-old male was admitted to our Department of Internal Medicine at Cannizzaro Hospital (Catania, Italy) because of the onset of abdominal pain with nausea, loose stools, and episodic flushing. Firstly, an abdominal contrast-enhanced CT scan showed a small pancreatic hyper-vascular mass; then, a gallium-68 DOTATOC integrated PET/CT revealed an elevated expression of SSTR receptors. Serum chromogranin A and urinary 5-HIAA measurements were negative. We performed an endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) by a fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB), allowing the immunostaining of a small mass (0.8 cm) and the diagnosis of a low-grade (G1) non-functional Pan-NET (NF-Pan-NET). Surgery was waived, while a follow-up strategy was chosen. The early recognition of Pan-NETs, although rare, is necessary to improve the patient's survival. Although helpful to allow for immunostaining, EUS-FNB needs to be warranted in future studies comparing EUS-FNB to EUS-FNA (fine-needle aspiration), which is, to date, reported as the tool of choice to diagnose Pan-NETs.

Endoscopic techniques for diagnosis and treatment of gastro-entero-pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: Where we are

BACKGROUND

The correct localization of the primary tumor site and a complete histological diagnosis represent the milestones for the proper management of gastro-entero-pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP-NENs).

AIM

To analyze current evidence on the role of endoscopy in the diagnosis/treatment of GEP-NENs.

METHODS

An extensive bibliographical search was performed in PubMed to identify guidelines and primary literature (retrospective and prospective studies, systematic reviews, case series) published in the last 15 years, using both medical subject heading (MeSH) terms and free-language keywords: gastro-entero-pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms; endoscopy; ultrasound endoscopy; capsule endoscopy; double-balloon enteroscopy; diagnosis; therapy; staging.

RESULTS

In the diagnostic setting, endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) represents the diagnostic gold standard for pancreatic NENs and the technique of choice for the locoregional staging of gastric, duodenal and rectal NENs. The diagnosis of small bowel NENs (sbNENs) has been improved with the advent of video capsule endoscopy and double-balloon enteroscopy, which allow for direct visualization of the entire small bowel; however, data regarding the efficacy/safety of these techniques in the detection of sbNENs are scanty and often inconclusive. From a therapeutic point of view, endoscopic removal is the treatment of choice for the majority of gastric NENs (type 1/2), for well-differentiated localized nonmetastatic duodenal NENs < 1 cm, confined to the submucosa layer and for < 10 mm, stage T1–T2, rectal NENs. EUS-guided pancreatic locoregional ablative treatments have been proposed in recent studies with promising results in order to control symptoms or reduce tumor burden in selected patients.

CONCLUSION

Standard axial endoscopy and EUS still play a pivotal role in several GEP-NENs. Advanced techniques for increasing the rate of R0 resection should be reserved for high-volume referral centers.