Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition by 22-Gauge Franseen and Standard Needles for Solid Pancreatic Lesions

Adverse events of 20-22G second-generation endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy needles for solid lesions in the upper gastrointestinal tract and adjacent organs: Systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Previous research has conducted meta-analyses on the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB). However, studies on adverse events (AEs) have been limited and sporadic and have included a highly diverse group of patients (with upper and lower gastrointestinal tract issues) and needles of varying sizes (19-22-25G). The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the incidence of AEs related to the utilization of 20-22G second-generation EUS-FNB needles subsequent to puncture of the upper gastrointestinal tract and adjacent organs.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, and SCIE databases from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2023. The primary outcome was percentage of summary AEs. Subgroup analyses were based on needle type, needle size, and lesion site.

RESULTS

A total of 99 studies were included in the analysis, with 9303 patients. The overall AE rate for 20-22G second generation EUS-FNB needles in upper gastrointestinal EUS-FNB was 1.8% (166/9303), with bleeding being the most common AE at 44.0%. The percentages of pancreatitis, abdominal pain, and other AEs were 24.1%, 21.1%, and 10.8%, respectively. Patients undergoing hepatic EUS-FNB had the highest incidence of AEs at 14.0%, followed by submucosal lesions at 3.2% and pancreatic lesions at 2.6%.

CONCLUSION

EUS-FNB is a safe procedure with a relatively low risk of upper gastrointestinal AEs (1.8%) and no associated deaths. Postoperative bleeding and pancreatitis are the most common complications of EUS-FNB. Most AEs are mild and self-limiting in severity, and serious complications are very rare.

Tissue processing of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration specimens from solid pancreatic lesions

Now that tissue cores can be obtained using fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles, the ways tissues are handled for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) are changing. Direct smear, touch smear of core tissues, and centrifugation have been used for cytological examinations, and liquid-based cytology (LBC), which allows immunostaining and genetic tests that use residual samples, is emerging as an alternative. We emphasize that liquid cytology (Cytospin™ cytology and LBC) is still important, because it enables the diagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) when cancerous cells are scarce in specimens. Cell blocks are being replaced by core tissues obtained via FNB needles. Recent reports indicate that rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) is not necessary when FNB needles are used, and macroscopic on-site evaluation is used to evaluate specimen adequacy. Macroscopic findings of specimens are helpful in the diagnostic workup and for clarifying specimen-handling methods. In addition to the red strings and white cores observed in PDAC, mixed red and white strings, gray tissues, and gelatinous tissues are observed. Gray (necrotic) tissues and gelatinous (mucus) tissues are more suitable than histology for cell block or cytological processing. Tumor cells in neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are numerous in red strings but cannot be observed macroscopically. ROSE might thus be necessary for lesions that may be NETs. Core tissues can be used for genetic tests, such as those used for KRAS mutations and comprehensive genomic profiling. Cytological materials, including slides and LBC specimens, can also be genetic test materials.

Feasibility of comprehensive genomic profiling using endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition with a 22-gauge Franseen needle

Aim

Comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) test for solid tumors is now increasingly utilized in clinical practice, especially in pancreatobiliary cancer, and specimens obtained by endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) are often submitted for tissue-based CGP test. In this study, we evaluated the feasibility of EUS-TA using a 22-gauge Franseen needle for the CGP test.

Methods

Consecutive patients with solid tumors who underwent EUS-TA using a 22-gauge Franseen needle, and whose tissue samples were pre-checked for suitability for CGP test, were included in this single-center, retrospective analysis. The success rates of appropriate sample collection for CGP evaluated by pathologists (1st quality control) and CGP test (2nd quality control) were evaluated. In addition, The EUS-TA slides were evaluated for the tissue area and tumor area content, using the image software.

Results

A total of 50 cases, with 78% of pancreatic cancer, were included in the analysis. A median of 3 passes of EUS-TA were performed with an adverse event rate of 4%. The success rates for 1st and 2nd quality control for CGP tests were 86% and 76%, respectively. The image analyses suggested EUS-TA specimen did not always fulfill CGP test criteria, with 18% of tissue area ≥16 mm2 and 38% of tumor area content ≥20%, even in cases with successful CGP tests. The suction method yielded a significantly larger amount of DNA but without a significant difference in the multivariate analysis.

Conclusions

The present study demonstrated the feasibility of EUS-TA using a 22-gauge Franseen needle for CGP test.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs before endoscopic ultrasound guided tissue acquisition to reduce the incidence of post procedural pancreatitis

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) with fine needle aspiration or fine needle biopsy is the gold standard for sampling tissue to diagnose pancreatic cancer and autoimmune pancreatitis or to analyze cyst fluid. The most common reported adverse event of fine needle aspiration and/or fine needle biopsy is acute pancreatitis, which is likely induced by the same pathophysiological mechanisms as after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). According to the current European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are administered prior to ERCP as a scientifically proven treatment to reduce post-ERCP pancreatitis incidence rate. A single suppository of diclofenac or indomethacin prior to EUS guided tissue acquisition (TA) is harmless in healthy adults. Since it is associated with low costs and, most important, may prevent a dreadsome complication, we strongly recommend the administration of 100 mg diclofenac rectally prior to EUS-TA. We will explain this recommendation in more detail in this review as well as the risk and pathophysiology of post-EUS TA pancreatitis.

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.

Current status and issues in genomic analysis using EUS-FNA/FNB specimens in hepatobiliary-pancreatic cancers

Comprehensive genomic profiling based on next-generation sequencing has recently been used to provide precision medicine for various advanced cancers. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) play essential roles in the diagnosis of abdominal masses, mainly pancreatic cancers. In recent years, CGP analysis using EUS-FNA/FNB specimens for hepatobiliary-pancreatic cancers has increased; however, the success rate of CGP analysis is not clinically satisfactory, and many issues need to be resolved to improve the success rate of CGP analysis. In this article, we review the transition from EUS-FNA to FNB, compare each test, and discuss the current status and issues in genomic analysis of hepatobiliary-pancreatic cancers using EUS-FNA/FNB specimens.

Safety and Diagnostic Yield of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy for Hypervascular Pancreatic Lesions

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) is a common technique for diagnosing pancreatic lesions with high accuracy and a low incidence of procedural adverse events. However, occasional adverse events, particularly bleeding, may occur. Procedures for hypervascular lesions are considered important, but their risks are unknown. We aimed to evaluate the safety and diagnostic yield of EUS-FNB for hypervascular pancreatic solid lesions. This study included 301 patients with 308 solid pancreatic lesions who underwent EUS-FNB between May 2011 and December 2018. We performed propensity-score matching to balance clinical differences between hypervascular and hypovascular lesions and analyzed 52 lesions. We compared the safety and diagnostic performance of propensity score-matched cohorts. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy rates of EUS-FNB for hypervascular lesions were 94.7%, 100%, and 96.2%, and those for hypovascular lesions were 80.0%, 100%, and 84.6%, respectively. There was no difference in diagnostic performance between hypervascular and hypovascular lesions. Furthermore, adverse events occurred in only one patient (pancreatitis) in the hypovascular group. There were no significant differences in the occurrence of adverse events between hypervascular and hypovascular lesions (0% vs. 3.8%, p = 1.000). Therefore, EUS-FNB may be safe with a high diagnostic yield, even for hypervascular solid pancreatic lesions.

Current Practice Patterns of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Sampling for Pancreatic Solid Mass in Korea: Outcomes of a National Survey

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Although endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) and fine needle biopsy (FNB) are widely used for tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid mass, the optimal strategy of this procedure has not been established yet. The aim of this nationwide study was to investigate the current practice patterns of EUS-FNA/FNB for pancreatic solid mass in Korea.

METHODS

The Policy-Quality Management of the Korean Pancreatobiliary Association (KPBA) developed a questionnaire containing 22 questions. An electronic survey consisting of the questionnaire was distributed by e-mail to members registered to the KPBA.

RESULTS

A total of 101 respondents completed the survey. Eighty respondents (79.2%) performed preoperative EUS-FNA/FNB for operable pancreatic solid mass. Acquire needles (60.4%) were used the most, followed by ProCore needles (47.5%). In terms of need size, most respondents (>80%) preferred 22-gauge needles regardless of the location of the mass. Negative suction with a 10-mL syringe (71.3%) as sampling technique was followed by stylet slow-pull (41.6%). More than three needle passes for EUS-FNA/FNB was performed by most respondents (>80%). The frequency of requiring repeated procedure was significantly higher in respondents with a low individual volume (<5 per month, p=0.001). Prophylactic antibiotics were routinely used in 39 respondents (38.6%); rapid on-site pathologic evaluation was used in 6.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

According to this survey, practices of EUS-FNA/FNB for pancreatic solid mass varied substantially, some of which differed considerably from the recommendations present in existing guidelines. These results suggest that the development of evidence-based quality guidelines fitting Korean clinical practice is needed to establish the optimal strategy for this procedure.

Comparison of 22-gauge standard and Franseen needles in EUS-guided tissue acquisition for diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions: a multicenter randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

This large multicenter randomized controlled trial compared the diagnostic yields of 22-gauge standard and 22-gauge Franseen needles for EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) of solid pancreatic lesions.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with solid pancreatic lesions were prospectively randomized to EUS-TA using standard or Franseen needles. Samples obtained with the first needle pass and with second and subsequent passes were evaluated separately. The primary endpoint was the rate of accuracy for diagnosis of malignancy. Other endpoints were technical success rate, sample cellularity, adverse events, diagnostic accuracy in patient subgroups, and the diagnostic accuracy and numbers of second and subsequent needle passes.

RESULTS

Of 523 patients undergoing EUS-TA, 260 were randomized to using standard 22-gauge needles and 263 to 22-gauge Franseen needles. The technical success rate in each group was 99.6%, with similar adverse event rates in the standard (1.5%) and Franseen (.8%) needle groups. First-pass EUS-TA using the Franseen needle resulted in significantly greater diagnostic accuracy (84.0% vs 71.2%, P < .001) and sensitivity (82.4% vs 66.7%, P < .001) than first-pass EUS-TA using a standard needle and also resulted in superior diagnostic accuracy in patients requiring immunostaining. Second and subsequent EUS-TA using Franseen needles showed significantly greater accuracy (94.7% vs 90.0%, P = .049) and sensitivity (94.0% vs 88.6%, P = .047) and required fewer needle passes (1.81 vs 2.03, P = .008) than using standard needles.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-TA with the Franseen needle is superior to EUS-TA with a standard needle with respect to diagnostic accuracy per pass, particularly in patients who require immunostaining, and number of passes when using macroscopic on-site evaluation. (Clinical trial registration numbers: UMIN000030634 and jRCTs052180062.).

Endoscopic ultrasonography‐guided tissue acquisition for small solid pancreatic lesions: Does the size matter?

Endoscopic ultrasonography‐guided tissue acquisition (EUS‐TA) is now an established technique to obtain the pathological diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs), but the diagnosis of small SPLS by EUS‐TA can still be difficult. We conducted a literature review and a meta‐analysis on the diagnostic yield of EUS‐TA according to the tumor size. In a meta‐analysis of 33 studies with 6883 cases, a pooled odds ratio (OR) of sensitivity was significantly higher in SPLs of >20 mm (OR 1.64, p = 0.02) and in SPLs of >10 mm (OR 3.05, p = 0.01), but not in SPLs of >30 mm (OR 1.18, p = 0.46). The meta‐analysis of accuracy also showed a similar trend: OR of 1.59 in SPLs of >20 mm (p < 0.01) and OR of 3.27 in SPLs of >10 mm (p < 0.01) and OR of 1.03 in SPLs of >30 mm (p = 0.87). The use of a 25‐gauge needle tended to improve sensitivity in small SPLs, though not statistically significant: OR of 1.25 and 2.82 in studies with and without a 25‐gauge needle (p = 0.08). The use of fine needle biopsy needles, slow pull method, and rapid on‐site evaluation did not significantly improve sensitivity in small SPLs. EUS‐TA for small SPLs, especially neuroendocrine neoplasms, is reported to have a high risk of adverse events. In summary, the diagnostic yield and safety of EUS‐TA for small (<20 mm) SPLs still needs improvement, and the best needle and technique for small SPLs should be further investigated.

The Utility of Endoscopic-Ultrasonography-Guided Tissue Acquisition for Solid Pancreatic Lesions

Endoscopic-ultrasonography-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) has been widely performed for the definitive diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs). As the puncture needles, puncture techniques, and sample processing methods have improved, EUS-TA has shown higher diagnostic yields and safety. Recently, several therapeutic target genomic biomarkers have been clarified in pancreatic ductal carcinoma (PDAC). Although only a small proportion of patients with PDAC can benefit from precision medicine based on gene mutations at present, precision medicine will also be further developed for SPLs as more therapeutic target genomic biomarkers are identified. Advances in next-generation sequencing (NGS) techniques enable the examination of multiple genetic mutations in limited tissue samples. EUS-TA is also useful for NGS and will play a more important role in determining treatment strategies. In this review, we describe the utility of EUS-TA for SPLs.

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.

A prospective multicenter study of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy using a 22-gauge Franseen needle for pancreatic solid lesions

BACKGROUND AND AIM

While encouraging data of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) using a 22-gauge Franseen needle have been reported, large-scale data of per pass and quantitative analyses are still lacking.

METHODS

This was a multicenter prospective study of EUS-FNB using the 22-gauge Franseen needle for a pancreatic solid lesion. Cytological and histological analyses per pass were evaluated and semi-quantitative analyses were performed on core tissue and blood contamination. Primary end-point was diagnostic accuracy per session. Prognostic factors were analyzed for diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, core tissue, and blood contamination.

RESULTS

A total of 629 passes were performed in 244 cases at 14 centers between 2018 and 2019. The median tumor size was 29 mm, and the puncture was transduodenal in 43%. The median pass number was 2. Diagnostic accuracy per session, at a first pass, and per pass were 93%, 90%, and 88%. In 198 cases with pancreatic cancer, diagnostic sensitivity per session, at a first pass, and per pass were 94%, 89%, and 89%. The rates of core tissue score of 4 and blood contamination score of 3 were 50% and 47%. The adverse event rate was 1.6%. In the multivariate analysis, tumor size ≤20 mm (odds ratio [OR] of 0.46, P = 0.03), transduodenal puncture (OR of 0.53, P = 0.04), and suction (OR of 0.16, P = 0.01) were associated with lower diagnostic accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

The EUS-FNB using the 22-gauge Franseen needle for pancreatic solid lesions showed high per pass and overall diagnostic accuracy.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy histology with a 22-gauge Franseen needle and fine-needle aspiration liquid-based cytology with a conventional 25-gauge needle provide comparable diagnostic accuracy in solid pancreatic lesions

Background and Aim

Fine‐needle biopsy (FNB) needles obtain more core samples and support the shift from cytologic to histologic evaluation; however, recent studies have proposed a superior diagnostic potential for liquid‐based cytology (LBC). This study compared the diagnostic ability of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)‐guided FNB histology with a 22‐gauge Franseen needle (22G‐FNB‐H) and fine‐needle aspiration (FNA) LBC with a conventional 25‐gauge needle (25G‐FNA‐LBC).

Methods

We analyzed 46 patients who underwent both 22G‐FNB‐H and 25G‐FNA‐LBC in the same lesion during the same endoscopic procedure. This study evaluated the diagnostic ability of each needle, diagnostic concordance between needles, and incremental diagnostic effect of both needles compared to using each needle alone.

Results

The agreement rate for malignancy between both techniques was 93.5% (kappa value = 0.82). There was no significant difference in the diagnostic ability of both methods. 22G‐FNB‐H and 25G‐FNA‐LBC provided an incremental diagnostic accuracy in two (4.3%) cases and one (2.2%) case, respectively.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrated that the diagnostic accuracy of 25G‐FNA‐LBC and 22G‐FNA‐H for solid pancreatic lesions were comparable. A conventional 25‐gauge needle that punctures lesions with ease can be used in difficult cases and according to the skill of the endoscopist.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Sampling for Personalized Pancreatic Cancer Treatment

Pancreatic cancer is the most lethal solid malignancy, and the number of patients with pancreatic cancer is increasing. Systemic chemotherapies are often ineffective for such patients, and there is an urgent need for personalized medicine. Unlike other types of cancer, personalized treatments for pancreatic cancer are still in development. Consequently, pancreatic cancer is less sensitive to anticancer drugs and is often refractory to common treatments. Therefore, advances in personalized medicine for pancreatic cancer are necessary. This review examined advances in personalized medicine for pancreatic cancer, including the use of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling. EUS-guided sampling is widely used for diagnosing pancreatic tumors and is expected to be applied to sampled tissues. Additionally, there has been an increase in clinical research using EUS-guided sampling. The combination of precision medicine using genomic testing and pharmacological profiles based on high-throughput drug sensitivity testing using patient-derived organoids is expected to revolutionize pancreatic cancer treatment.

RNA Extraction from Endoscopic Ultrasound-Acquired Tissue of Pancreatic Cancer Is Feasible and Allows Investigation of Molecular Features

Transcriptome analyses allow the distinguishing of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) subtypes, exhibiting different prognoses and chemotherapy responses. However, RNA extraction from pancreatic tissue is cumbersome and has been performed mainly from surgical samples, which are representative of < 20% of cases. The majority of PDAC patients undergo endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA), but RNA has been rarely extracted from EUS-TA with scanty results. Herein, we aimed to determine the best conditions for RNA extraction and analysis from PDAC EUS-TA samples in order to carry out molecular analyses. PDAC cases underwent diagnostic EUS-TA, with needles being a 25G fine needle aspiration (FNA) in all patients and then either a 20G lateral core-trap fine needle biopsy (FNB) or a 25G Franseen FNB; the conservation methods were either snap freezing, RNALater or Trizol. RNA concentration and quality (RNA integrity index; RIN) were analyzed and a panel of genes was investigated for tissue contamination and markers of molecular subtype and aggressivity through qRT-PCR. Seventy-four samples from 37 patients were collected. The median RNA concentration was significantly higher in Trizol samples (10.33 ng/uL) compared with snap frozen (0.64 ng/uL; p < 0.0001) and RNALater (0.19 ng/uL; p < 0.0001). The RIN was similar between Trizol (5.15) and snap frozen samples (5.85), while for both methods it was higher compared with RNALater (2.7). Among the needles, no substantial difference was seen in terms of RNA concentration and quality. qRT-PCR analyses revealed that samples from all needles were suitable for the detection of PDAC subtype markers (GATA6 and ZEB1) and splice variants associated with mutational status (GAP17) as well as for the detection of contaminating tissue around PDAC cells. This is the first study that specifically investigates the best methodology for RNA extraction from EUS-TA. A higher amount of good quality RNA is obtainable with conservation in Trizol with a clear superiority of neither FNA nor FNB needles. RNA samples from EUS-TA are suitable for transcriptome analysis including the investigation of molecular subtype and splice variants expression.

Role of Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration/Biopsy in the Diagnosis of Autoimmune Pancreatitis

Type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is histologically characterized by lymphoplasmacytic sclerosing pancreatitis (LPSP). Recently, the diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine needle aspiration/biopsy (EUS-FNA/B) for AIP has been reported. However, its role in the diagnostic flow of AIP is not fully elucidated. We retrospectively reviewed 53 consecutive patients who were suspected with AIP and underwent EUS-FNA/B. We evaluated the contribution of EUS-FNA/B to the diagnosis of AIP before considering response to steroid therapy among patients with diffuse enlargement of the pancreas and those with focal enlargement, respectively. Twenty-two patients showed diffuse pancreatic enlargement and 31 showed focal enlargement. The final diagnosis was definitive AIP in 32 patients, probable AIP in 2, possible AIP in 1, and mass-forming focal pancreatitis in 18. There was no change in diagnosis after EUS-FNA/B among patients with diffuse pancreatic enlargement, while diagnosis changed in 38.7% (12/31) among those with focal enlargement—there was a probable to definitive diagnosis in 4 patients, unspecified to definitive in 3, and unspecified to probable in 5. EUS-FNB provided a significantly higher sensitivity for typical pathological findings of LPSP than EUS-FNA, and 10 patients were diagnosed as pathologically definitive AIP by EUS-FNB, though none were by EUS-FNA (p = 0.002). EUS-FNA/B was useful in the diagnosis of focal type AIP, and steroid therapy could be introduced after the diagnosis was confirmed. Meanwhile, EUS-FNA/B provided no contribution to diagnosis of diffuse type AIP. EUS-FNB showed a higher diagnostic yield than FNA.

Pancreatic cancer with ovarian metastases: A case report and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer with ovarian metastases is rare and easily misdiagnosed. Most patients are first diagnosed with ovarian cancer. We report a rare case of ovarian metastases secondary to pancreatic adenocarcinoma. We also review the literature to analyze the clinical characteristics of, diagnostic methods for, and perioperative management strategies for this rare malignancy.

CASE SUMMARY

A 48-year-old woman with an abdominal mass presented to our hospital. Computed tomography revealed lesions in the pancreas and lower abdomen. Radiological examination and histological investigation of biopsy specimens revealed either an ovarian metastasis from a pancreatic neoplasm or two primary tumors, with metastasis strongly suspected. The patient simultaneously underwent distal pancreatectomy plus splenectomy by a general surgeon and salpingo-oophorectomy with hysterectomy by a gynecologist. Histological examination of the surgical specimen revealed a pancreatic adenocarcinoma (intermediate differentiation, mucinous) and a metastatic mucinous adenocarci-noma in the ovary.

CONCLUSION

For this rare tumor, surgical resection is the most effective treatment, and the final diagnosis depends on tumor pathology.

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.