Harmonic contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration: Fact or fiction?

Contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration versus standard fine-needle aspiration in pancreatic masses: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

It is still unclear whether endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) contrast-enhanced fine-needle aspiration (CH-EUS-FNA) determines superior results in comparison to standard EUS-FNA in tissue acquisition of pancreatic masses. Aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the diagnostic outcomes of these two techniques.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed/Medline and Embase database through October 2020 and identified 6 studies, of which 2 randomized controlled trials (recruiting 701 patients). We performed pairwise meta-analysis through a random effects model and expressed data as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

Pooled diagnostic sensitivity was 84.6% (95% CI 80.7%-88.6%) with CH-EUS-FNA and 75.3% (67%-83.5%) with EUS-FNA, with evidence of a significant superiority of the former (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.26-2.40; p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis confirmed the superiority of CH-EUS-FNA over EUS-FNA only in larger lesions. Pooled diagnostic accuracy was 88.8% (85.6%-91.9%) in CH-EUS-FNA group and 83.6% (79.4%-87.8%) in EUS-FNA group (OR 1.52, 1.01-2.31; p = 0.05). Pooled sample adequacy was 95.1% (91.1%-99.1%) with CH-EUS-FNA and 89.4% (81%-97.8%) with EUS-FNA (OR 2.40, 1.38-4.17; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

CH-EUS-FNA seems to be superior to standard EUS-FNA in patients with pancreatic masses. Further trials are needed to confirm these results.

Enhanced EUS imaging (with videos)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS remains a primary diagnostic tool for the evaluation of pancreaticobiliary disease. Although EUS combined with FNA or biopsy sampling is highly sensitive for the diagnosis of neoplasia within the pancreaticobiliary tract, limitations exist in specific clinical settings such as chronic pancreatitis. Enhanced EUS imaging technologies aim to aid in the detection and diagnosis of lesions that are commonly evaluated with EUS.

METHODS

We reviewed technologies and methods for enhanced imaging during EUS and applications of these methods. Available data regarding efficacy, safety, and financial considerations are summarized.

RESULTS

Enhanced EUS imaging methods include elastography and contrast-enhanced EUS (CE-EUS). Both technologies have been best studied in the setting of pancreatic mass lesions. Robust data indicate that neither technology has adequate specificity to serve as a stand-alone test for pancreatic malignancy. However, there may be a role for improving the targeting of sampling and in the evaluation of peritumoral lymph nodes, inflammatory pancreatic masses, and masses with nondiagnostic FNA or fine-needle biopsy sampling. Further, novel applications of these technologies have been reported in the evaluation of liver fibrosis, pancreatic cysts, and angiogenesis within neoplastic lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

Elastography and CE-EUS may improve the real-time evaluation of intra- and extraluminal lesions as an adjunct to standard B-mode and Doppler imaging. They are not a replacement for EUS-guided tissue sampling but provide adjunctive diagnostic information in specific clinical situations. The optimal clinical use of these technologies continues to be a focus of ongoing research.

Contrast-Enhanced Harmonic Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration versus Standard Fine-Needle Aspiration in Pancreatic Masses: A Propensity Score Analysis

Background: Whether endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) contrast-enhanced fine-needle aspiration (CH-EUS-FNA) determines superior results in comparison to standard EUS-FNA in tissue acquisition of pancreatic masses remains unclear. The aim of this study was to compare these two techniques on a series of patients with solid pancreatic lesions. Methods: 362 patients underwent EUS-FNA (2008–2019), after the propensity score matching of two groups were compared; 103 treated with CH-EUS-FNA (group 1) and 103 with standard EUS-FNA (group 2). The primary outcome was the diagnostic accuracy. Secondary outcomes were sensitivity, specificity, and sample adequacy. Results: Diagnostic sensitivity was 87.6% in group 1 and 80% in group 2 (p = 0.18). The negative predictive value was 56% in group 1 and 41.5% in group 2 (p = 0.06). The specificity and positive predictive values were 100% for both groups. Diagnostic accuracy was 89.3% and 82.5%, respectively (p = 0.40). Sample adequacy was 94.1% in group 1 and 91.2% in group 2 (p = 0.42). The rate of adequate core histologic samples was 33% and 28.1%, respectively (p = 0.44), and the number of needle passes to obtain adequate samples were 2.4 ± 0.6 and 2.7 ± 0.8, respectively (p = 0.76). These findings were confirmed in subgroup analyses, conducted according to lesion size and contrast enhancement pattern. Conclusions: CH-EUS-FNA does not appear to be superior to standard EUS-FNA in patients with pancreatic masses.

The usefulness of contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration for evaluation of hepatic lesions (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Small hepatic masses often do not have distinct margins on B-mode EUS images. Contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (CEH-EUS) is widely used for evaluating ambiguous pancreatic lesions. However, its role in detecting hepatic lesions and the use of EUS-guided FNA are not well evaluated. We investigated the usefulness of CEH-EUS-guided FNA for evaluating hepatic lesions.

METHODS

Thirty consecutive patients with hepatic masses underwent CEH-EUS and CEH-EUS-guided FNA between September 2010 and November 2016.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients (93.3%) had malignant tumors and 2 patients (6.7%) had benign hepatic masses. Before contrast enhancement, 73.3% of the hepatic lesions (22/30) in the patient cohort were visible on B mode. After contrast enhancement, 93.3% of these hepatic lesions (28/30) were distinguishable from the surrounding liver parenchyma. The technical success rate was 100%. The median tumor size on EUS and the number of needle passes were 24.5 mm (interquartile range [IQR], 14.5-40.8) and 2 (IQR, 2-3), respectively. The diagnostic accuracy of CEH-EUS-guided FNA was 86.7% (26/30 cases). There were no procedure-related adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

CEH-EUS-guided FNA can be a safe and efficient method for the diagnosis of hepatic masses. It can result in high diagnostic accuracy in cases where the hepatic lesions are poorly visible on conventional EUS.

EUS liver assessment using contrast agents and elastography

Transabdominal-US is the first-line imaging modality used to assess the whole liver parenchyma and vascularization; EUS assessment of the liver is incomplete and is not sufficient to rule out the presence of focal liver lesions. On the other hand, due the high diagnostic yield in detecting very small (< 1 cm) lesions, EUS is considered complementary to radiological imaging techniques for the investigation of liver parenchyma. Scarce data are available regarding the investigation of liver parenchyma using both EUS-elastography (EUS-E) and CH-EUS. The aim of this review is to evaluate the clinical role of image enhancement techniques, namely EUS-E and contrast harmonic-EUS (CH-EUS), for the evaluation liver diseases. Despite a potential interest for the application of EUS-E in the assessment of liver diseases, available evidence relegates this technique only to research areas, such as the differential diagnosis between benign and malignant focal liver lesions and the quantification of liver fibrosis in diffuse parenchymal diseases. With the future introduction of EUS shear-wave elastography, interesting data can be obtained for the assessment of liver fibrosis during real-time EUS evaluation. The usefulness of CH-EUS for the evaluation of liver disease is limited by the intrinsic EUS ability to explore only the left lobe and a small part of the right lobe. CH-EUS could be used to increase the diagnostic ability of EUS for the detection and characterization of small lesions and for guiding tissue sampling. Targeting EUS-guided treatments with either EUS-E or CH-EUS might represent potential future applications.

Serous pancreatic neoplasia, data and review

AIM

To describe the imaging features of serous neoplasms of the pancreas using ultrasound, endoscopic ultrasound, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging.

METHODS

This multicenter international collaboration enhances a literature review to date, reporting features of 287 histologically confirmed cases of serous pancreatic cystic neoplasms (SPNs).

RESULTS

Female predominance is seen with most SPNs presenting asymptomatically in the 5^th through 7^th decade. Mean lesion size was 38.7 mm, 98% were single, 44.2% cystic, 46% mixed cystic and solid, and 94% hypoechoic on B-mode ultrasound. Vascular patterns and contrast-enhancement profiles are described as hypervascular and hyperenhancing.

CONCLUSION

The described ultrasound features can aid differentiation of SPN from other neoplastic lesions under most circumstances.