Endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses: the fine needle aspiration or fine needle biopsy dilemma. Is the best needle yet to come?

Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Tissue Acquisition of Pancreatic Malignancy: A Retrospective Study at a Tertiary Center

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is gaining ground in today's diagnostic routine due to its ability to provide dynamic, accurate representations, but mostly because it facilitates tissue sampling amenable to histopathologic studies. Our main objective was to assess the accuracy of sampling pancreatic malignancies through EUS-fine-needle aspiration (FNA) compared to EUS-fine-needle biopsy (FNB) at a tertiary referral center, where rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) for EUS-FNA is not available.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective, 5-year analysis of all EUS-guided tissue acquisitions of pancreatic masses suggestive of neoplasia was performed. Out of the 484 patients who initially underwent non-invasive imaging studies, 401 subjects were ultimately confirmed as malignant using EUS-FNA/FNB or surgery.

RESULTS

Overall, the accuracy of EUS-guided sampling was 91%. There were 36 patients (9%) with false-negative results after EUS, who were further addressed to surgery and confirmed with pancreatic malignancy. Cytological and histological examinations found that FNB was significantly higher than FNA regarding the diagnostic yield (91.3% vs. 84.1%; p-value<0.05). Moreover, FNB required fewer needle punctures than FNA to achieve a definitive diagnosis (1.63 vs. 1.99; p-value<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic management of pancreatic malignancies is unequivocally improved by FNB needles, rendering an improved tissue acquisition at a lower number of passes.

Metastatic synovial sarcoma masquerading as primary neuroendocrine tumor of pancreas: a diagnostic conundrum

Metastatic sarcomas to the pancreas are extremely rare, with poor survival rates. Therefore, rapid diagnosis and differentiation from primary malignant tumors of pancreas thereby guiding the treatment is indispensable. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) is the current diagnostic modality of choice for pancreatic tumor sampling with promising results. Definitive pathologic diagnosis requires adequate tissue for performing ancillary studies. We present a rare case of metastatic synovial sarcoma in the pancreas in an elderly male to endorse the utility of EUS-FNB with imprint cytology as a rapid and effective diagnostic tool.

The World Health Organization Reporting System for Pancreaticobiliary Cytopathology: Review and Comparison to the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology System

CONTEXT.—

The World Health Organization (WHO) Reporting System for Pancreaticobiliary Cytopathology (WHO System) is the product of a joint venture between the World Health Organization, the International Academy of Cytology, and the International Agency for Research on Cancer. The WHO System revises the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology System for Reporting Pancreaticobiliary Cytology (PSC System) and replaces the 6-tiered system with a 7-tiered system.

OBJECTIVE.—

To explain the WHO System and the differences with the PSC System.

DATA SOURCES.—

The WHO System and the PSC System of Reporting Pancreaticobiliary Cytopathology.

CONCLUSIONS.—

The diagnostic categories of the WHO System are "Insufficient/Inadequate/Nondiagnostic"; "Benign (Negative for Malignancy)"; "Atypical"; "Pancreaticobiliary Neoplasm, Low Risk/Low Grade (PaN-Low)"; "Pancreatic Neoplasm, High Risk/High Grade (PaN-High)"; "Suspicious for Malignancy"; and "Malignant." In the WHO System, the "benign" category includes both nonneoplastic and neoplastic lesions, so the "Neoplastic: Benign" category of the PSC system has been eliminated. Low-grade malignancies, pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs), and solid-pseudopapillary neoplasm (SPN) classified as "Neoplastic: Other" in the PSC System are classified as "Malignant" in the WHO System, leaving in the "Neoplasm" category intraductal lesions, which are divided into 2 new diagnostic categories: "Pancreaticobiliary Neoplasm (PaN)-Low Risk/Grade" and "PaN-High Risk/Grade." As with the PSC System, the WHO System advocates close correlation with imaging and encourages incorporation of ancillary testing into the final diagnosis, such as biochemical (carcinoembryonic antigen [CEA] and amylase) and molecular testing. The WHO System includes risk of malignancy per category, and reporting and diagnostic management options that recognize the variations in resources of low- and middle-income countries.

The additive diagnostic value of cytology in fine needle biopsy of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A tertiary center experience

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic ultrasound guide fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) is the main diagnostic tool for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. In most instances, only histology is obtained via FNB, without sending cytological slides. The aim of our study was to assess the additive diagnostic yield of cytology performed through FNB.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of all patients with histological diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma who were diagnosed by EUS-FNB.

RESULTS

Overall, 80 patients were included in the study period. The overall concordance between cytology and histology all FNB needles was 78.2%. Notably, cytological assessment improved the diagnostic yield for malignancy by 12.8%. The overall kappa coefficient correlation between histology and cytology was .501, 95% CI 0.361-0.641. However, the kappa correlation for suspicious of malignancy and malignant was excellent of .872, 95% CI 0.733-1, suggesting that cytology is crucial when histology is inconclusive. Further analysis showed that the Acquire and Sharkcore needles outperformed the Procore needle in term of concordance between cytology and histology (kappa correlation of .527, 95% CI 0.331-0.724, .515, 95% CI 0.265-0.764, and .297, 95% CI -0.051-0.646), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Performing cytology specimen when using FNB improves the diagnostic yield in pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

The Underrecognized Role of Cannabis in the Etiology of Acute Pancreatitis

Cannabis-induced pancreatitis (CIP) is an emerging clinical entity that presents unique challenges in diagnosis and management. This narrative review explores the current understanding of CIP, synthesizing evidence from epidemiological, pathophysiological, and clinical studies. The rising prevalence of cannabis use worldwide has been paralleled by an increase in reported cases of CIP, particularly among younger populations. Pathophysiological mechanisms involve the interaction of exogenous cannabinoids with pancreatic cannabinoid receptors, potentially disrupting normal pancreatic function and triggering inflammation. Clinical presentation of CIP often mimics other forms of acute pancreatitis (AP), necessitating a high index of suspicion and thorough history-taking for accurate diagnosis. Management strategies align with established protocols for AP, with an emphasis on supportive care and cannabis cessation to prevent recurrence. While short-term outcomes are generally favorable, the risk of progression to chronic pancreatitis in cases of continued cannabis use underscores the importance of long-term follow-up and abstinence counseling. This review also highlights significant knowledge gaps, including the need for standardized diagnostic criteria, a better understanding of dose-response relationships, and potential interactions with other risk factors. Future research directions should focus on elucidating precise pathophysiological mechanisms, developing targeted therapies, and investigating the impact of different cannabis formulations and consumption methods on pancreatic health. As cannabis use continues to increase globally, a comprehensive understanding of its effects on pancreatic function is crucial for improving patient outcomes and informing public health policies.

The yield of cytology and histology obtained by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration and biopsy needles in the diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration and biopsy (EUS-FNA, -FNB) are the mainstay for tissue diagnosis of pancreatic lesions. Traditionally, FNA was performed for obtaining cytology and also histology if available from the puncture. Since their advent, however, FNB needles have been intended mainly to obtain core biopsies for histological specimens.

AIMS

We aimed to assess the yield of cytology obtained via both FNA and FNB needles.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed including all patients who were diagnosed with pancreatic adenocarcinoma obtained via EUS-FNA/FNB needles.

RESULTS

Overall, 227 patients were included. Of them, 85 patients underwent FNB, versus 142 patients who had FNA. The average age in the FNB group was 70.46 ± 11.29 years, versus 71.44 ± 11.80 in the FNA group, P = 0.57. Notably, cytological analysis diagnosed malignancy equally in both groups (69.4% in the FNB group, vs. 65.5% in the FNA group). The compatibility rate of cytology with histology was 76.5% in the FNB group, versus 76.1% in the FNA group (P = 0.69). The agreement level between cytology obtained by FNA and FNB, versus histology obtained by both needles, was moderate (kappa = 0.48, 95% CI 0.39-0.57). Similarly, the agreement level between cytology and histology in the FNB group was moderate as well (kappa = 0.5, 95% CI 0.36-0.64).

CONCLUSION

Cytological assessment yielded an equal performance as compared to histological assessment with both needles. We recommend obtaining cytology specimens in pancreatic solid lesion puncture by FNB needle.

Stereomicroscopic on-site evaluation in endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions

BACKGROUND/AIMS

In stereomicroscopic sample isolation processing, the cutoff value (≥4 mm) of stereomicroscopically visible white cores indicates high diagnostic sensitivity. We aimed to evaluate endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) using a simplified stereomicroscopic on-site evaluation of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions (SELs).

METHODS

In this multicenter prospective trial, we performed EUS-TA using a 22-gauge Franseen needle in 34 participants with SELs derived from the upper gastrointestinal muscularis propria, requiring pathological diagnosis. The presence of stereomicroscopically visible white core (SVWC) in each specimen was assessed using stereomicroscopic on-site evaluation. The primary outcome was EUS-TA's diagnostic sensitivity with stereomicroscopic on-site evaluation based on the SVWC cutoff value (≥4 mm) for malignant upper gastrointestinal SELs.

RESULTS

The total number of punctures was 68; 61 specimens (89.7%) contained stereomicroscopically visible white cores ≥4 mm in size. The final diagnoses were gastrointestinal stromal tumor, leiomyoma, and schwannoma in 76.5%, 14.7%, and 8.8% of the cases, respectively. The sensitivity of EUS-TA with stereomicroscopic on-site evaluation based on the SVWC cutoff value for malignant SELs was 100%. The per-lesion accuracy of histological diagnosis reached the highest level (100%) at the second puncture.

CONCLUSION

Stereomicroscopic on-site evaluation showed high diagnostic sensitivity and could be a new method for diagnosing upper gastrointestinal SELs using EUS-TA.

Comparing the diagnostic adequacy of 25-Gauge fork-tip versus franseen versus reverse-bevel-type needles in EUS-guided tissue acquisition: A prospective randomized study with a retrospective control

Background and Objectives

EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (FNB) is an established technique for the acquisition of tissue to diagnose lesions of the gastrointestinal tract and surrounding organs. Recently, newer-generation FNB needles have been introduced, including a second-generation reverse-bevel and the third-generation fork-tip and Franseen needles. We aimed to determine if there was any difference between these needles in terms of cytopathological diagnostic yield, sample cellularity, or sample bloodiness.

Methods

One hundred twenty-seven consecutive patients undergoing EUS-guided FNB of any solid lesion were randomized to use either a Franseen or fork-tip needle in a 1:1 ratio and were compared with 60 consecutive historical cases performed with reverse-bevel needles. Patient and procedure characteristics were recorded. Cases were reviewed by a blinded cytopathologist and graded based on cellularity and bloodiness. Overall diagnostic yield was calculated for each study arm.

Results

One hundred seventy-six cases were eligible for analysis, including 109 pancreatic masses, 24 lymphoid lesions, 17 subepithelial lesions, and 26 other lesions. The final diagnosis was malignancy in 127 cases (72%). EUS-guided FNB was diagnostic in 141 cases (80%) overall and in 89% of cases where malignancy was the final diagnosis. There was no difference in diagnostic yield, sample cellularity, or sample bloodiness between the different needle types. There was no difference in adverse events between groups.

Conclusions

EUS-guided FNB performed using 25-gauge Franseen, fork-tip, and reverse-bevel needles resulted in similar diagnostic yield, sample cellularity, and sample bloodiness. Our results may not be extrapolated to larger-caliber needles of the same design.

Comparing fine needle biopsy techniques in solid pancreatic lesions: A prospective randomized study

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsies (EUS-FNB) are the best technique for sampling solid pancreatic lesions. However, the most appropriate biopsy technique has not been standardized using Fine Needle Biopsy (FNB) needles. The aim of this work was to identify the best biopsy technique to achieve the best tissue integrity and cause the least blood contamination.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients ≥18 years of age with solid pancreatic lesions who underwent EUS-FNB at our institution from January 2020 to May 2021 were consecutively selected. Three passes were performed with each of the threee techniques to obtain tissue: suction with 10 ml of vacuum, capillary, and wet. An independent pathologist evaluated the received tissue integrity and the degree of blood contamination of each sample according to scales.

RESULTS

Seventy-five patients were recruited for our study. A superior tissue integrity was observed using the wet-suction technique in lesions located in the body and/or tail of the pancreas, and an average score of 4.40 (p = 0.027) was assigned for this technique. Regarding the contamination of the sample in the whole cohort, the simple-suction technique shown a higher contamination, 1.55 (p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference among the techniques when evaluating tissue integrity or contamination in lesions larger or smaller than 3 cm.

CONCLUSION

When performing EUS-FNB for solid pancreatic lesions located in the head/uncinated process, the three methods provided similar diagnostic yields. The wet-suction technique had a higher score in tissue integrity when lesions were located in the body and/or tail of the pancreas.

Device malfunctions with use of EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy devices: Analysis of the MAUDE database

Background

The safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition through fine-needle biopsy devices is well-established in clinical trials. The real-world experience of using these devices is not known. The authors analyzed the postmarketing surveillance data from the Food and Drug Administration Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database to answer this question.

Methods

The Food and Drug Administration MAUDE database from January 2012 to June 2022 was accessed to evaluate for device malfunctions and patient-related adverse consequences of these malfunctions.

Results

There were 344 device-related issues. Most issues were due to detachment or breakage of the device (n = 185 [53.7%]). Seventy-six of the breakages (40.8%) occurred during the procedure, whereas 89 cases (47.8%) occurred while removing the needle from the endoscope. The most common site of tissue biopsy at the time of needle breakage was the pancreas (44 [23.8%]).The common patient-related adverse events were retained foreign body (n = 50 [14.5%]) followed by bleeding (16, 4.6%). Six patients (3.4%) required a second intervention for removal of the retained foreign bodies including surgery in 2 cases. The device breakage damaged the endoscope in 3 cases (1.7%), and there was 1 case of needlestick injury to the nurse.

Conclusion

The fine-needle biopsy devices can be associated with needle breakage and bending; these adverse events were not previously reported. Needle breakages can result in a retained foreign body that may require additional procedures including surgery. These real-world findings from the MAUDE database may inform clinical decisions and help improve clinical outcomes.

Comprehensive review on endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition techniques for solid pancreatic tumor

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is speculated to become the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality by 2030, a high mortality rate considering the number of cases. Surgery and chemotherapy are the main treatment options, but they are burdensome for patients. A clear histological diagnosis is needed to determine a treatment plan, and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition (TA) is a suitable technique that does not worsen the cancer-specific prognosis even for lesions at risk of needle tract seeding. With the development of personalized medicine and precision treatment, there has been an increasing demand to increase cell counts and collect specimens while preserving tissue structure, leading to the development of the fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle. EUS-FNB is rapidly replacing EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) as the procedure of choice for EUS-TA of pancreatic cancer. However, EUS-FNA is sometimes necessary where the FNB needle cannot penetrate small hard lesions, so it is important clinicians are familiar with both. Given these recent dev-elopments, we present an up-to-date review of the role of EUS-TA in pancreatic cancer. Particularly, technical aspects, such as needle caliber, negative pressure, and puncture methods, for obtaining an adequate specimen in EUS-TA are discussed.

Imaging Recommendations for Diagnosis, Staging, and Management of Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth most prevalent cause of cancer-related death worldwide, with a fatality rate equal to its incidence rate. Pancreatic cancer is a rare malignancy with a global incidence and death ranking of 14th and 7th, respectively. Pancreatic cancer cases are divided into three categories without metastatic disease: resectable, borderline resectable, or locally advanced disease. The category is determined by the tumor's location in the pancreas and whether it is abutting or encasing the adjacent arteries and/or vein/s.

The stage of disease and the location of the primary tumor determine the clinical presentation: the pancreatic head, neck, or uncinate process, the body or tail, or multifocal disease. Imaging plays a crucial role in the diagnosis and follow-up of pancreatic cancers. Various imaging modalities available for pancreatic imaging are ultrasonography (USG), contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and 18-fluoro-deoxy glucose positron emission tomography (FDG PET).

Even though surgical resection is possible in both resectable and borderline resectable non-metastatic cases, neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy has become the standard practice for borderline resectable cases as it gives a high yield of R0 resection.

Endoscopic Ultrasound Biopsy Needle

In the past few years, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) has superseded EUS-fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for EUS-guided tissue acquisition. EUS-FNA does not retain the stroma as well as the surrounding tissue architecture and therefore had limitations in achieving a definitive diagnosis. Development of EUS-FNB needles had improved the diagnostic ability of EUS by providing core tissue sample that not only preserves surrounding tissue architecture but also provides adequate material for molecular typing and gene profiling of sampled lesions. At present, there are three commercially available third-generation EUS-FNB needles with unique needle tip designs. In this review, we aim to elucidate the technical aspects of the available EUS-FNB needles.

Endosonography-Guided Tissue Acquisition for Diagnosis of Squamous Carcinoma of the Pancreas: A Report of Three Cases

While approximately 85% of neoplasms are ductal pancreatic adenocarcinomas (DPA), adenosquamous pancreatic carcinoma (APC) is a rare subtype of pancreatic cancer that exhibits aggressive behavior and poor prognosis. The authors report three cases of primary APC diagnosed through endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) using the new ProCore 20G needle, which had been developed to improve fine-needle aspiration results by providing more tissue for histopathology. Given its ability for microcore retrieval, pancreatic stroma examination, and excellent histopathology results, EUS-TA has exhibited exceptional diagnostic yield among patients with solid pancreatic lesions. All three APC cases presented herein had been accurately diagnosed using immunohistochemistry after microcore acquisition.

Technical Performance, Overall Accuracy and Complications of EUS-Guided Interventional Procedures: A Dynamic Landscape

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) gained wide acceptance as the diagnostic and minimally invasive therapeutic approach for intra-luminal and extraluminal gastrointestinal, as well as various non-gastrointestinal lesions. Since its introduction, EUS has undergone substantial technological advances. This multi-centric study is a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of patients who underwent EUS for the evaluation of lesions located within the gastrointestinal tract and the proximal organs. It aimed to extensively assess in dynamic the dual-center EUS experience over the course of the past 20 years. Hence, we performed a population study and an overall assessment of the EUS procedures. The performance of EUS-FNA/FNB in diagnosing pancreatic neoplasms was evaluated. We also investigated the contribution of associating contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging (CE-EUS) with EUS-FNA/FNB for differentiating solid pancreatic lesions or cystic pancreatic lesions. A total of 2935 patients undergoing EUS between 2002–2021 were included, out of which 1880 were diagnostic EUS and 1052 EUS-FNA/FNB (80% FNA and 20% FNB). Therapeutic procedures performed included endoscopic transmural drainage of pancreatic fluid collections, celiac plexus block and neurolysis, while diagnostic EUS-like CE-EUS (20%) and real-time elastography (12%) were also conducted. Most complications occurred during the first 7 days after EUS-FNA/FNB or pseudocyst drainage. EUS and the additional tools have high technical success rates and low rates of complications. The EUS methods are safe, cost effective and indispensable for the diagnostic or therapeutic management in gastroenterological everyday practice.

Multicenter prospective study of the efficacy of stereomicroscopic on-site evaluation in endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition in patients with pancreatic cancer

OBJECTIVE

In sample isolation processing by stereomicroscopy (SIPS), a technique used to assess the quality of specimens collected during endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA), the cutoff value of stereomicroscopically visible white core (SVWC) (≥11 mm) indicates high diagnostic sensitivity. However, the procedure of SIPS is complicated and time-consuming. Therefore, we devised the stereomicroscopic on-site evaluation (SOSE), a new rapid assessment method that is simpler than SIPS and only determines if the SVWC cutoff value is attained. We aimed to examine the usefulness of SOSE in a multicenter, prospective setting.

METHODS

Seventy patients from multiple institutions with solid pancreatic masses suspected to be pancreatic cancer were included. EUS-TA was performed using a 22-gauge Franseen needle. SVWCs were measured on-site using stereomicroscopy. The primary outcome was the sensitivity of SVWC cutoff value in EUS-TA with SOSE.

RESULTS

The total number of punctures was 214 and SOSE was performed on 150 punctures. The SVWC cutoff value collection rate was 100% per lesion, with 80% in the first pass, 79% in the second pass, and 78% per puncture in all passes. The median time taken to determine the SVWC cutoff value for SOSE was 47 s. The sensitivity of the SVWC cutoff value was 93.2% for histology and 96.6% for cytology + histology. The per-lesion accuracy of pathological diagnosis reached the highest level (98.6%) at the second puncture.

CONCLUSIONS

SOSE showed high diagnostic sensitivity and may be a new rapid assessment method for the diagnosis of malignant pancreatic cancer using EUS-TA.

Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration vs fine needle biopsy for pancreatic masses, subepithelial lesions, and lymph nodes

Endoscopic ultrasound tissue acquisition, in the form of both fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB), is utilized for pancreatic mass lesions, subepithelial lesions, and lymph node biopsy. Both procedures are safe and yield high diagnostic value. Despite its high diagnostic yield, EUS-FNA has potential limitations associated with cytological aspirations, including inability to determine histologic architecture, and a small quantitative sample for further immunohistochemical staining. EUS-FNB, with its larger core biopsy needle, was designed to overcome these potential limitations. However, it remains unclear which technique should be used and for which lesions. Comparative trials are plagued by heterogeneity at every stage of comparison; including variable needles used, and different definitions of endpoints, which therefore limit generalizability. Thus, we present a review of prospective trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses on studies examining EUS-FNA vs EUS-FNB. Prospective comparative trials of EUS-FNA vs EUS-FNB primarily focus on pancreatic mass lesions, and yield conflicting results in terms of demonstrating the superiority of one method. However, consistent among trials is the potential for diagnosis with fewer passes, and a larger quantity of sample achieved for next generation sequencing. With regard to subepithelial lesions and lymph node biopsy, fewer prospective trials exist, and larger prospective studies are necessary. Based on the available literature, we would recommend EUS-FNB for peri-hepatic lymph nodes.

An Investigation on the Results of Cytopathologic Tests of Pancreatobiliary System Performed in the Pathology Department in Iran

Background & Objective

Pancreatobiliary system disorders commonly include inflammatory diseases and tumors. Diagnosis of pancreatic cancer is challenging and is mostly achieved when the disease has extensively progressed, and metastasis has occurred. Therefore, this study was performed to evaluate cytopathology in the diagnosis of Pancreatobiliary malignancies, which can improve diagnostic adequacy and accuracy.

Methods

A total of 116 cytopathologic results of the Pancreatobiliary system, performed in the Pathology Department of Taleghani Hospital, Tehran, Iran during 2017-2018 were selected and examined in this observational study. The frequency of different results was determined and compared with other variables.

Results

The most common location of the lesions was the pancreas (47%). The lesions were categorized as malignant, benign, negative, suspicious for malignancy (SFM), and atypical in 28%, 10%, 24%, 14%, and 9% of the cases, respectively. In other cases, lesions were considered non-diagnostic. Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) was conducted in 25% of patients. Compatibility of the initial and final diagnoses was 100%, 50%, and 60% in cases with "malignant", "benign", and "negative" diagnoses, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, as well as positive and negative predictive values of cytopathology in the diagnosis of Pancreatobiliary lesions were 75.8%, 92.3%, 95.9%, and 61.5%, respectively.

Conclusion

Our findings indicated that half of the lesions of the Pancreatobiliary system were positive, SFM, and atypical. Fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) were effective modalities in diagnosing Pancreatobiliary malignancies. The most important point in our experience is the increase in diagnostic sensitivity in the presence of ROSE. Therefore, the simultaneous use of ROSE and EUS-FNA can reduce the need for re-sampling.

Comparison of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition Using a 20-Gauge Menghini Needle with a Lateral Forward Bevel and a 22-Gauge Franseen Needle: A Single-Center Large Cohort Study

Background/Aims

Several fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles are available for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition. However, there is disagreement on which type of needle has the best diagnostic yield. The aim of this study was to compare the performance and safety of two commonly used EUS-FNB needles.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients who underwent EUS-FNB between June 2016 and March 2020 in our hospital. Two types of needles were evaluated: a 20-gauge Menghini needle with a lateral forward bevel and a 22-gauge Franseen needle. Rapid on-site evaluation was performed in all the cases. A multivariate analysis was performed to clarify the negative predictive factors for obtaining a histological diagnosis. Propensity score matching was performed to compare the diagnostic yields of these two needles.

Results

We analyzed 666 patients and 690 lesions. The overall diagnostic rate of histology alone was 88.8%, and the overall adverse event rate was 1.5%. Transduodenal access and small lesions (≤2 cm) were identified as negative predictive factors for obtaining a histological diagnosis. After propensity score matching, 482 lesions were analyzed. The diagnostic accuracy rates of histology in the M and F needle groups were 89.2% and 88.8%, respectively (p=1.00).

Conclusions

Both the needles showed high diagnostic yield, and no significant difference in performance was observed between the two.

Use of suction during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions with a Franseen-tip needle: a pilot comparative trial

Background and study aims  The utility of suction during endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) fine-needle biopsy (FNB) using Franseen-tip needle remains unclear and has not been evaluated in randomized trials. We designed a randomized crossover trial to compare the diagnostic yield during EUS-FNB using a 22G Franseen-tip needle, with and without standard suction. Patients and methods  Consecutive patients undergoing EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic lesions were recruited. A minimum of two passes were performed for each case: one with 20-mL syringe suction (S+) and another without (S-). The order of passes was randomized and the pathologist blinded. The endpoints were the diagnostic yield and the impact of blood contamination in the diagnosis. Results  Fifty consecutive patients were enrolled. The overall diagnostic accuracy was 84 %. A diagnosis of malignancy was obtained in 70 samples: 36 in the S+group and 34 in the S-group. A statistically significant difference was seen in the diagnostic accuracy (S+: 78 % vs. S-: 72 %, P  < 0.01) and blood contamination (S+: 68 %; S-: 44 %, P  < 0.01). The sensitivity, specificity, negative likelihood ratio and positive likelihood ratio for S+vs. S-samples were 76.6 % vs. 73.9 %, 100 % vs. 100 % and 0.23 vs. 0.26, NA vs NA, respectively. A negative impact of blood contamination in the overall diagnostic yield wasn't seen, even in samples where suction was used (OR 0.36, P  = 0.15) Conclusions  We found a higher diagnostic yield with the use of suction. It was associated with a higher degree of sample blood contamination that did not affect the diagnostic performance.

The bleeding risk after endoscopic ultrasound-guided puncture of pancreatic masses

BACKGROUND

Although EUS-fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is considered to be safe, there are limited studies on adverse events of fine-needle biopsy (FNB).

AIM

To compare the bleeding rate of EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB of solid and cystic pancreatic masses.

METHODS

Our retrospective study included EUS-FNA/FNB of solid and cystic pancreatic masses performed between 02/2017-03/2019 in Klinikum Klagenfurt and 11/2018-03/2019 in University Hospital St. Pölten, Austria. Minor bleeding was defined as an event with a duration of more than 1 min, no need for intervention, large coagulum on the puncture site, or decrease in hemoglobin ≥1.5 g/dL (but <2 g/dL). Major bleeding was defined as a reduction in hemoglobin level ≥2 g/dL, need for red cell transfusions, or interventional hemostasis.

RESULTS

About 202 patients were biopsied in that period (141 solid, 61cystic pancreatic masses). FNA needle was used in 54.6% of cases with solid pancreatic masses and 73.7% of cysts. Bleeding with hemodynamic instability was not observed in our cohort. In pancreatic cysts, minor bleeding was observed in 8.2% of cases and was associated with the use of FNB needles and lower platelet count. In solid tumors, one major bleeding (0.7%) from a duodenal vessel occurred and was immediately treated with hemoclip. In this group, minor bleeding was observed in 15.6% of cases. Overall, the bleeding rate correlates with the use of FNB needles.

CONCLUSION

Use of EUS-FNB needles increases the rate of minor bleeding for both solid and cystic pancreatic tumors, while major bleeding is a rare occurrence, irrespective of the needle type.

Focal Autoimmune Pancreatitis: A Simple Flow Chart for a Challenging Diagnosis

Autoimmune pancreatitis is a chronic fibroinflammatory autoimmune mediated disease of the pancreas. Clinically, obstructive painless jaundice and upper abdominal pain are the main symptoms. Focal AIP is characterized by segmental involvement of pancreatic parenchyma and it is often radiologically represented by a pancreatic mass. In these cases, the diagnosis can be very challenging, since it may be easily confused with pancreatic cancer. Therefore, we suggest a combined approach of imaging tests as the diagnostic workup. EUS study combined with CEUS and elastography, if available, increases the accuracy of the method to rule out cancer. Moreover, the lesion should always be sampled under EUS guidance to obtain a cyto/histological diagnosis. The diagnostic workup should also include the use of diagnostic clinical criteria (extrapancreatic lesions, steroid response) and laboratory findings (CA 19.9 and IgG4 evaluations).

Effectiveness of introducing a 20-gauge core biopsy needle with a core trap in EUS-FNA/B for diagnosing pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration/biopsy (EUS-FNA/B) is a standard method for pathological diagnosis of pancreatic solid lesions. The EchoTip ProCore 20G® (PC20), a 20-gauge biopsy needle with a forward-bevel core trap, has been available in Japan since 2015.

METHODS

We compared the efficacy of the PC20 with that of the EchoTip ProCore 22G® (PC22) and Acquire 22G® (AC22) in EUS-FNA/B for diagnosing pancreatic cancer. This retrospective study included 191 patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent EUS-FNA/B using the PC20, PC22, or AC22 at our facility from April 2013 to October 2019. We investigated the patients' clinical characteristics and the diagnostic accuracy and safety of each needle.

RESULTS

A sufficient stroke length of puncture was secured in all patients. The maximum length under EUS was shorter with the AC22 (22.1 ± 2.2 mm) than PC20 (30.6 ± 0.7 mm, p < 0.01) and PC22 (30.3 ± 0.8 mm, p < 0.01). The histological accuracy was 96.4% with the PC20 but only 58.8% with the PC22 (adjusted p (p-adj) < 0.0001) and 75.0% with the AC22 (p-adj = 0.06). The diagnostic accuracy of the combination of histology and cytology was 96.4% with the PC20, while it was 72.1% with the PC22 (p-adj < 0.0001) and 91.7% with the AC22 (p-adj > 0.99). One patient (0.9%) in the PC20 group developed mild pancreatitis, but no adverse events occurred with the other needles.

CONCLUSIONS

The PC20 showed better diagnostic capability than the PC22. The diagnostic efficacy was similar between the PC20 and AC22. The high histological accuracy of the PC20 could be advantageous for lesions in which histological assessment is critical.

Tissue acquisition and pancreatic masses: Which needle and which acquisition technique should be used?

Background and study aims  Pancreatic cancer represents the fourth most common cause of cancer-related deaths in Western countries and the need of a low-risk investigation to obtain an accurate histopathological diagnosis has become increasingly pressing. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) with fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is the standard method for obtaining samples from pancreatic masses. In recent years, there has been an increasing need to obtain histological specimens during EUS procedures, rather than cytological ones, to guide oncological treatment options, leading to the so-call "FNB concept." Different needles have been developed for fine-needle biopsy (FNB) in recent years, enabling acquisition of larger specimens on which to perform histological and molecular analyses. The aim of this narrative review was to assess the role of EUS-guided FNA and FNB in patients with pancreatic masses, and to identify which needle and which acquisition technique should be used to improve tissue acquisition.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Biopsy Needles Provide Higher Diagnostic Yield Compared to Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration Needles When Sampling Solid Pancreatic Lesions: A Meta-Analysis

Background/Aims

Studies comparing the utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) for solid pancreatic lesions have been inconclusive with no clear superiority. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the diagnostic accuracy and safety between the two sampling techniques.

Methods

We performed a systematic search of randomized controlled trials published between 2012 and 2019. The primary outcome was overall diagnostic accuracy. Secondary outcomes included adverse event rates, cytopathologic and histopathologic accuracy, and the mean number of passes required to obtain adequate tissue between FNA and FNB needles. Fixed and random effect models with pooled estimates of target outcomes were developed.

Results

Eleven studies involving 1,365 participants were included for analysis. When compared to FNB, FNA had a significant reduction in diagnostic accuracy (81% and 87%, p=0.005). In addition, FNA provided reduced cytopathologic accuracy (82% and 89%, p=0.04) and an increased number of mean passes required compared to FNB (2.3 and 1.6, respectively, p<0.0001). There was no difference in adverse event rate between FNA and FNB needles (1.8% and 2.3% respectively, p=0.64).

Conclusions

FNB provides superior diagnostic accuracy without compromising safety when compared to FNA. FNB should be readily considered by endosonographers when evaluating solid pancreatic masses.