Impact of EUS-guided FNA of enlarged mediastinal lymph nodes on subsequent thoracic surgery rates

BACKGROUND: A histopathologic diagnosis of metastasis in enlarged mediastinal lymph nodes usually results in non-surgical management. Cytologic specimens obtained by EUS-guided FNA can be used to detect malignancy in posterior mediastinal lymph nodes. The purpose of this study was to determine the rate of thoracic surgery after EUS-guided FNA of enlarged mediastinal lymph nodes. METHODS: A prospective observational study of patients with enlarged posterior mediastinal lymphadenopathy who were referred for EUS-guided FNA. All patients were candidates for mediastinoscopy. Patients were followed for 12 months to determine the subsequent rate of mediastinoscopy or thoracotomy and the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided FNA. RESULTS: Evaluation of cytologic specimens obtained by EUS-guided FNA revealed malignancy in 23 of 59 (39%) patients. The overall rate of surgery was 22% (13/59): 95% CI[0.12, 0.35]. The surgery rate for patients with a positive cytologic result was 4% (1/23) compared with 33% (12/36) for those with a negative result (p=0.009). Of patients with CT findings of a peripheral lung mass plus mediastinal lymphadenopathy, 22 of 26 (42%) underwent surgery after EUS-guided FNA, compared with two of 33 (6%) of those with mediastinal lymphadenopathy alone (p=0.0009). For cytologic evaluation of specimens obtained by EUS-guided FNA, the overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for the diagnosis of malignant lymphadenopathy were 96%, 100%, and 98%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Few patients who undergo EUS-guided FNA of enlarged posterior mediastinal lymph nodes require subsequent thoracic surgery.     

EUS-FNA of recurrent postoperative extraluminal and metastatic malignancy

BACKGROUND: EUS-guided FNA is safe and accurate for the diagnosis of benign or malignant neoplasia and lymphadenopathy; however, its role in the diagnosis of recurrent malignancy is not well described. METHODS: A prospectively updated EUS-guided FNA cytology database was used to identify patients in whom a diagnosis of postoperative, recurrent, extraluminal, or metastatic malignancy was made over a 5-year period. Only patients with a positive EUS-guided FNA were included in the analysis. All had undergone surgery for the primary malignancy and were in clinical and/or radiographic remission before the initial suspicion of tumor recurrence. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients underwent EUS-guided FNA of 21 lesions (19 masses, 2 lymph nodes) because of a suspicion of recurrent malignancy based on CT (n = 17) or EUS (n = 4) findings. Median time from the initial diagnosis to recurrence was 26 months (range 5-276 months). Lesions were located in the pancreas (9 patients), mediastinum (7), liver (3), perigastric region (1), and liver hilum (1). EUS-guided FNA (mean number of needle passes, 4.5; range 2-8) obtained diagnostic material for recurrent malignancy in all patients as follows: esophageal (6 patients), renal cell (6), pancreatic (2), breast (2), colon (2), bile duct (1), Ewing's sarcoma (1), and lung (1) cancer. No complication was encountered. Transgastric EUS-guided FNA (4 patients), distal, or transesophageal EUS-FNA (2) proximal to a surgical anastomosis was required to confirm recurrence in all 6 patients with esophageal cancer. The initial cytologic diagnosis of recurrent malignancy was made by EUS in 20 of 21 (95%) patients. One patient with recurrent breast cancer had CT-guided FNA of a right lung mass preceding EUS-guided FNA of an AP window lymph node. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided FNA can detect and safely diagnose recurrent malignancy in the mediastinum, retroperitoneum, and liver. When possible, correlation between EUS-guided FNA cytology and original tumor histopathology/cytology, or the use of immunostaining to confirm the diagnosis, is recommended.     

Combination of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration with standard bronchoscopic techniques for the diagnosis of stage I and stage II pulmonary sarcoidosis

Background and objective: Standard bronchoscopic techniques (transbronchial lung biopsy and endobronchial biopsy) provide a diagnosis in 70% of patients with pulmonary sarcoidosis. Previous data suggest that endobronchial ultrasound‐guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS‐TBNA) has a high sensitivity in patients with sarcoidosis. The feasibility and utility of combining EBUS‐TBNA with standard bronchoscopic techniques is unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety and efficacy of combined EBUS‐TBNA and standard bronchoscopic techniques in patients with suspected sarcoidosis and enlarged mediastinal or hilar lymphadenopathy. Methods: Forty consecutive patients with suspected pulmonary sarcoidosis and enlarged mediastinal or hilar lymph nodes (radiographical stage I and stage II) underwent EBUS‐TBNA followed by transbronchial biopsies and endobronchial biopsies under conscious sedation. Results: Thirty‐nine out of 40 patients successfully underwent combined EBUS‐TBNA and standard bronchoscopy. Twenty‐seven patients were diagnosed with sarcoidosis, eight had tuberculosis, two had reactive lymphadenopathy, two had lymphoma and one had metastatic adenocarcinoma. In patients with sarcoidosis, the sensitivity of EBUS‐TBNA for detection of non‐caseating granulomas was 85%, compared with a sensitivity of 35% for standard bronchoscopic techniques (P < 0.001). The diagnostic yield of combined EBUS‐TBNA and bronchoscopy was 93% (P < 0.0001). Conclusions: Combination of EBUS‐TBNA with standard bronchoscopic techniques is safe and feasible, and optimizes the diagnostic yield in patients with pulmonary sarcoidosis and enlarged intrathoracic lymphadenopathy.     

Clinical impact of on-site cytopathology interpretation on endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration

OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-guided FNA) is becoming a preferred modality for diagnosing and staging GI and mediastinal malignancies. Although experts advocate on-site cytopathology assessment for tissue sample adequacy, there are few data to support this claim. Our goal was to determine whether on-site cytopathology interpretation improves the diagnostic yield of EUS-guided FNA. METHODS: EUS-guided FNA results from two university hospital centers were reviewed and compared. At center 1, where EUS-guided FNA was performed with a cytopathologist on site, the results of 108 consecutive patients were evaluated. At center 2, where a cytopathologist is unavailable, the results of 87 consecutive patients were reviewed. One endoscopist performed all procedures at both institutions. Cytologic diagnoses were categorized as positive or negative for malignancy, suspicious for malignancy, atypical/indeterminate, or unsatisfactory. The number of repeat procedures, needle passes, medication use, target site, age, and sex were compared between the two sites. RESULTS: Patients at center 2 were older (p = 0.04) and predominantly female (p = 0.03). Pancreas was the most common target site at center 2, whereas thoraco-abdominal nodes were the most common at center 1 (p = 0.0001). Patients at center 1 had a diagnosis of positive or negative for malignancy more frequently (p = 0.001) and were less likely to have an unsatisfactory specimen (p = 0.035) or repeat procedure, although the latter was not significant (p = 0.156). CONCLUSION: On-site cytopathology interpretation improves the diagnostic yield of EUS-guided FNA. EUS centers should allocate resources to cover for on-site cytopathology evaluation.     

Mediastinal transthoracic needle and core lymph node biopsy: should it replace mediastinoscopy?

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Primary assessment of mediastinal lymph nodes (N2 or N3) for staging lung cancer by transthoracic needle with or without core biopsy. Mediastinoscopy only performed after FNA failed to yield a diagnosis. DESIGN AND SETTINGS: A retrospective study in a university setting. PATIENTS: Eighty-nine patients with mediastinal lymphadenopathy (> 1.5 cm in short-axis diameter) by CT. METHODS: Mediastinal transthoracic fine-needle aspiration (FNA) with or without core biopsy was performed prior to mediastinoscopy in 89 patients with mediastinal lymphadenopathy (lymph node > 1.5 cm in short-axis diameter) or masses by CT. RESULTS: Mediastinal transthoracic FNA was used alone in 39 of 89 patients, or with core biopsy in 50 of 89 patients. Mediastinal transthoracic FNA with or without core biopsy was diagnostic in 69 of 89 patients (77.5%) for cancer cell type, sarcoidosis, or caseating granulomas with or without tuberculosis. Transthoracic FNA with or without core biopsy of nodal stations (total, 94 biopsies) judged readily accessible by mediastinoscopy (n = 59) included paratracheal (n = 56) and highest mediastinal (n = 3); those more difficult (n = 26) included subcarinal (n = 20) and aorticopulmonary window (n = 6); and those impossible (n = 9) included paraesophageal and pulmonary ligament (n = 6), parasternal (n = 2), and para-aortic (n = 1). Innovative lung protective techniques for CT-guided biopsy access windows included "iatrogenic-controlled pneumothorax" (n = 10) or saline solution injection creating a "salinoma" (n = 11). Pneumothorax was detected in only 10% with a "protective" technique but 60% when traversing lung parenchyma. Transthoracic FNA with or without core biopsy failed to yield a diagnosis in 20 of 89 patients (22.5%); all then underwent mediastinoscopy, with 11 of 20 procedures (55%) diagnostic for cancer, and 9 of 20 procedures diagnostic of benign diagnosis or no cancer. CONCLUSION: Transthoracic FNA with or without core biopsy accesses virtually all mediastinal nodal stations is diagnostic in 78% of cases with mediastinal adenopathy or masses, and should precede mediastinoscopy in the staging of lung cancer or workup of mediastinal masses.     

EUS-guided FNA of the left adrenal gland in patients with thoracic or GI malignancies

BACKGROUND: The diagnostic yield and safety of trans-gastric EUS-guided FNA of the left adrenal gland are not well defined. METHODS: All patients with an enlarged left adrenal gland on abdominal imaging and known or suspected malignancy referred to two EUS centers over a 3-year period were included in this study. EUS-guided FNA was performed on an outpatient basis by one of 4 experienced endosonographers. RESULTS: Thirty-one consecutive patients (21 men, 10 women; mean age 64.8 years) were evaluated. Tissue adequate for interpretation was obtained in all patients; no attempt to obtain tissue was unsuccessful. The median number of needle passes was 4.5 (range 1-8). No immediate complications were encountered. EUS-guided FNA confirmed malignant left adrenal involvement in 42% (13/31) of the patients. Patients with malignant left adrenal masses were more likely to have known cancer at another site (OR 12.0: 95% CI[1.6, 87.9]). Patients with benign masses were more likely to have preservation of the normal sonographic appearance of the adrenal gland ("seagull" configuration) compared with those with malignant masses (OR 9.8: 95% CI[1.9, 51.0]). The accuracy of EUS imaging based on size (> or =3 cm) alone was 81%: 95% CI[63, 93]). Of the patients with malignant adrenal masses, 85% (11/13) died or their clinical condition deteriorated during follow-up, while 15% (2/13) were being treated and were stable clinically. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided FNA of the left adrenal gland is a minimally invasive, safe, and highly accurate method that confirms or excludes malignant adrenal involvement in patients with thoracic or GI malignancies.     

EUS-guided FNA of lung masses adjacent to or abutting the esophagus after unrevealing CT-guided biopsy or bronchoscopy

BACKGROUND: The accuracy, the safety, and the cost-effectiveness of EUS-guided FNA for screening patients with lung cancer for mediastinal metastasis are well established, but the utility of EUS-guided FNA in evaluating lung mass per se has not been investigated. This study retrospectively evaluated experience with EUS-guided FNA of lung mass lesions after unsuccessful attempts by CT-guided or bronchoscopic tissue sampling to establish a tissue diagnosis. METHODS: A database was searched for all patients who had EUS-guided FNA of lung mass lesions over a 3-year period. The diagnostic yield and safety of EUS-guided FNA were evaluated. OBSERVATIONS: Eighteen patients (11 men, 7 women) underwent EUS-guided FNA of lung mass lesions adjacent to or abutting the esophagus. The indication for EUS-guided FNA was evaluation of the mediastinum of patients with lung mass of unclear etiology. EUS-guided FNA yielded tissue for diagnosis in 100% of patients: 15 non-small-cell lung cancer, one small-cell lung cancer, two metastatic lung disease. Ten patients had unresectable disease; in 8, the mass was confined to the lung parenchyma. The mean number of needle passes required to establish a diagnosis was two (range 1-6). No complication was encountered (mean follow-up 141 days; range 72-396 days). Five patients underwent curative surgery, and 13 had palliative chemoradiation. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, EUS-guided FNA of lung mass was safe, and it established a diagnosis in all patients with accessible lesions. Given these preliminary data, a prospective evaluation of this new indication for EUS-guided FNA is justified.     

Diagnostic value of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology of mediastinal masses in patients with intrapulmonary lesions and nondiagnostic bronchoscopy

Several procedures are available for the cytopathological diagnosis of mediastinal lesions. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) in patients with mediastinal mass lesions/lymph node enlargement. All patients had intrapulmonary lesions on chest X ray and/or CT scan, and inconclusive findings by endobronchial forceps biopsy and/or brush cytology. EUS-guided FNA was performed in 16 patients using a modified oblique forward-viewing gastroscope with an electronic multielement curved linear ultrasound transducer. After the region of interest was localized, a 22-gauge Vilmann-Hancke needle was introduced via the 2-mm biopsy channel. The cytological diagnosis of EUS-guided FNA was conclusive for cancer in 9 patients and in the other 7 patients the aspirated samples revealed a benign lesion. In 10 patients the final diagnosis was cancer, thus EUS-guided FNA was diagnostic for malignancy in all but 1 of the lesions (sensitivity 90.0%). In 1 patient epitheloid cell granuloma was detected by cytological examination of the FNA. Following tuberculostatic treatment the lesions disappeared completely on CT scan and EUS. The overall accuracy in this study amounted to 93.7%. From this and other studies discussed, it is assumed that the procedure is an accurate and safe technique to examine nodular lesions suggestive of metastatic lymph node involvement.     

Endosonographically controlled fine needle aspiration cytology--indications and results in routine diagnosis]

The usefulness and clinical utility of routine EUS-guided fine needle aspiration cytology (FNA) in the diagnosis of lesions adjacent to the upper gastrointestinal tract was prospectively studied. METHODS: EUS/FNA was performed in 122 patients for 125 lesions: Mediastinal lymph nodes (n = 56), pancreatic lesions (n = 45), paragastric masses (n = 12), submucosal tumors (n = 4) and small hepatic lesions (n = 2) were successfully punctured for cytological diagnosis. RESULTS: Adequate material was gained in 119 out of 125 punctures (95%). Overall sensitivity, specifity, positive and negative predictive value were 90%, 98%, 98% and 89%. Results of EUS/FNA in mediastinal lymph nodes were superior (95%, 100%, 100%, 90%) to those in pancreatic lesions (80%, 100%, 100%, 80%). In paragastric masses sensitivity was 100% whereas specifity was only 67%--due to one false-positive result. Out of four submucosal tumors diagnosis was revealed in three. Two liver metastasis were successfully punctured. 35 out of 56 mediastinal nodes showed malignancy. 27 metastases of lung-, three of gastric-, two of renal cancer and three Non-Hodgkins's lymphoma were diagnosed. The cytological results of 45 pancreatic lesions showed cancer in 19 and chronic inflammation in 21, two abscesses and three benign cysts. There were no complications. 37 patients were treated on outpatient's basis. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided FNA is an accurate and safe technique to sample cytology from lesions adjacent to the wall of the upper gastrointestinal tract. New indications may be established for the diagnosis of lung cancer or metastases of other spreading out into the mediastinum or the celiac axis.     

EUS-guided trucut needle biopsies in patients with solid pancreatic masses: a prospective study

BACKGROUND: A trucut needle biopsy device that can be used to obtain specimens from the pancreas and other perigastric organs under EUS guidance has been developed and successfully tested in animals. Moreover, EUS-guided trucut needle biopsy has been used safely in humans and appears to provide more accurate results than EUS-guided FNA. This study prospectively assessed the clinical utility of this new device in patients with solid pancreatic masses. METHODS: Twenty-three consecutive patients with radiologically detected solid pancreatic masses underwent EUS-guided trucut needle biopsy. Pancreatic malignancy detected by EUS-guided trucut needle biopsy was considered a definitive diagnosis. Further diagnostic procedures and clinical course were used to establish or exclude the presence of malignancy in all other patients. RESULTS: Pancreatic tissue was obtained in 17 of the 23 patients (74%), including all patients in whom the transgastric approach was used. No acute or long-term complication was observed. Histopathologic evaluation revealed pancreatic cancer in 12 patients. CT-guided biopsy specimens were obtained in 4 of the 5 patients with a negative EUS-guided trucut needle biopsy result; two were positive for adenocarcinoma. Overall diagnostic accuracy was 61%. Subgroup analysis of the 16 patients in whom EUS-guided trucut needle biopsy was successful and who were available for follow-up revealed a diagnostic accuracy of 87.5%. CONCLUSIONS: This prospective study demonstrates that EUS-guided trucut needle biopsy, when performed transgastrically, is safe and accurate in the evaluation of patients with solid pancreatic masses.     

EUS-guided FNA diagnostic yield of malignancy in solid pancreatic masses: a benchmark for quality performance measurement

BACKGROUND: The diagnostic yield of EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) of solid pancreatic masses is a potential benchmark for EUS-FNA quality, because the majority of EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic masses should be diagnostic for malignancy. OBJECTIVES: To determine the cytologic diagnostic rate of malignancy in EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic masses and to determine if variability exists among endoscopists and centers. DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective study. PATIENTS: EUS centers provided cytology reports for all EUS-FNAs of solid, noncystic, >or=10-mm-diameter, solid pancreatic masses during a 1-year period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT: Cytology diagnostic of pancreatic malignancy. RESULTS: A total of 1075 patients underwent EUS-FNA at 21 centers (81% academic) with 41 endoscopists. The median number of EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic masses performed during the year per center was 46 (range, 4-177) and per endoscopist was 19 (range, 1-97). The mean mass dimensions were 32 x 27 mm, with 73% located in the head. The mean number of passes was 3.5. Of the centers, 90% used immediate cytologic evaluation. The overall diagnostic rate of malignancy was 71%, 95% confidence interval 0.69%-0.74%, with 5% suspicious for malignancy, 6% atypical cells, and 18% negative for malignancy. The median diagnostic rate per center was 78% (range, 39%-93%; 1st quartile, 61%) and per endoscopist was 75% (range, 0%-100%; 1st quartile, 52%). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study, participation bias, and varying chronic pancreatitis prevalence. CONCLUSIONS: (1) EUS-FNA cytology was diagnostic of malignancy in 71% of solid pancreatic masses and (2) endoscopists with a final cytologic diagnosis rate of malignancy for EUS-FNA of solid masses that was less than 52% were in the lowest quartile and should evaluate reasons for their low yield.     

Factors influencing visibility and diagnostic yield of transbronchial biopsy using endobronchial ultrasound in peripheral pulmonary lesions

Background and objective:   Endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) has increased the diagnostic yield of bronchoscopic biopsy of peripheral pulmonary lesions (PPL). However, certain lesions cannot be localized by EBUS, and the factors associated with the visibility of PPL by EBUS have not been investigated. This study evaluated the factors predicting the visualization of EBUS in PPL and the diagnostic yield of EBUS-guided transbronchial biopsy (TBB).
Methods:   n 2007, 83 patients with PPL underwent EBUS-guided TBB, and their medical records were reviewed and analysed retrospectively.
Results:   Of the 83 patients examined, EBUS images could not be obtained in 23 patients (28%). Lesion size was a determining factor for the visibility of PPL, with the visualization yield of EBUS in lesions <20 mm being significantly lower than that in lesions ≥20 mm ( P  < 0.001). A definitive diagnosis of PPL localized by EBUS was established using EBUS-guided TBB in 73% of patients. There were no significant differences in diagnostic yield related to underlying disease, lobar distribution, CT scan appearance or presence of complications. Multivariate analysis revealed that the location of PPL on CT scans and position of the probe were independent predictors of the diagnostic yield by EBUS-guided TBB ( P  < 0.001 and P  = 0.001, respectively).
Conclusions:   Lesion size is a significant factor predicting visualization of EBUS for PPL. The location of PPL on CT scans and position of the probe are significantly related to a higher diagnostic yield with EBUS-guided TBB.     

Prospective study of a Trucut needle for performing EUS-guided biopsy with EUS-guided FNA rescue

BACKGROUND: EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) is an accurate technique for sampling extraintestinal masses and lymph nodes. The use of a Trucut needle to perform EUS-guided biopsy (EUS-TCB) may improve the results or simplify the procedure. To date, few studies have prospectively assessed the performance and the safety of EUS-TCB. METHODS: Patients with a known or a suspected malignancy referred for a diagnostic and/or staging EUS examination were enrolled in a prospective study. EUS-guided biopsy was performed first with a 19-gauge Trucut needle. If the Trucut failed to obtain an adequate sample or when the "in room" touch preparation was benign, EUS-FNA was performed with a standard 22-gauge FNA needle. The objective of the study was to assess the yield of detection of malignancy and the safety of EUS-TCB in patients with known or suspected malignancies and to investigate if EUS-FNA has a role for rescue in cases of Trucut failure. OBSERVATIONS: Thirty-nine lesions underwent EUS-TCB in 30 patients. Sufficient follow-up was available for all patients. By using EUS-TCB, we were able to obtain a sample for diagnosis in all but 3 patients (one pancreatic mass and two lymph nodes) in which technical problems arose. In these patients, the diagnosis was obtained in two cases by EUS-FNA and in the other one by EUS-TCB from the primary pancreatic tumor. The yield of detection of malignancy for EUS-TCB was 84%. No complications were recorded in any patients at 1 and 7 days of follow-up. The sample size is limited to generalize conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-TCB is a safe and an accurate procedure to obtain a histologic diagnosis in patients with known or suspected malignancies. EUS-FNA can serve as a rescue technique in cases of Trucut failure.     

Malignant mediastinal lymphadenopathy detected by staging EUS in patients with pancreaticobiliary cancer

BACKGROUND: In patients with pancreatic cancer, the presence of malignant mediastinal lymphadenopathy (MML) would preclude definitive resection. A recent study suggested routine evaluation for mediastinal lymph-node metastases in all patients being evaluated for pancreaticobiliary masses. In our practice, we routinely assess for mediastinal lymph-node metastases in all patients undergoing EUS for pancreaticobiliary cancer. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the presence of MML by EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) in 160 consecutive patients with a definite diagnosis of pancreaticobiliary cancer (pancreatic and periampullary cancers) who underwent EUS-FNA by a single operator from 2000 to 2004. Lymph nodes that were round and hypoechoic with sharp margins were considered suspicious and were sampled by FNA. RESULTS: Of the 160 patients included in this study, 78 had peripancreatic lymph nodes (49%: 95% CI[41%, 58%]), 25 had celiac lymph nodes (16%: 95% CI[10%, 22%]), and 14 patients had mediastinal lymph nodes (9%: 95% CI[4%, 13%]) that were suspicious for malignancy by morphologic criteria. In 8 of 14 patients with suspicious mediastinal lymph nodes, FNA documented MML in 5%: 95% CI[2%, 8%]. Only one of these 8 patients with MML had other sites of documented distant metastases by CT and/or positron emission tomography scans. However, 7 of 8 patients had locally advanced cancers. CONCLUSIONS: MML is detected by staging EUS-FNA in 5% of patients with pancreaticobiliary cancer. Because of its important implications, endosonographers should routinely assess for MML in patients who undergo staging EUS for pancreaticobiliary malignancy.     

Preliminary experience comparing routine cytology results with the composite results of digital image analysis and fluorescence in situ hybridization in patients undergoing EUS-guided FNA

BACKGROUND: Studies indicate enhanced diagnostic accuracy for digital image analysis (DIA) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) versus routine cytology examination (RC) when biliary strictures are evaluated. These tumor markers have not been applied to EUS-guided FNA. OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to determine the accuracy of RC versus the composite results of DIA/FISH. DESIGN: Patients enrolled with known or suspected malignancy. The final diagnosis was based on strict cytopathologic and imaging criteria and 12-month follow-up. SETTINGS: Tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: A total of 39 patients were enrolled in whom each diagnostic test was performed on samples from 42 sites to evaluate lymphadenopathy (n=19), pancreatic mass (n=19), esophageal or gastric wall mass (n=3), and thyroid mass (n=1). INTERVENTIONS: EUS-guided FNA with RC, DIA, and FISH. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENT: Diagnostic accuracy of RC, DIA, and FISH. RESULTS: Malignancy was diagnosed in 30 of 42 patients, including esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, esophageal adenocarcinoma, gastric adenocarcinoma, pancreatic adenocarcinoma, pancreatic mucinous cystic neoplasia, intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia, metastatic forearm sarcoma, small cell and non-small cell lung cancer, thyroid carcinoma, malignant GI stromal tumor, melanoma, adenocarcinoma of unknown primary, and lymphoma. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of DIA/FISH versus RC for detecting malignancy were 97%, 100%, and 98% versus 87%, 100%, and 90%, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Single-center pilot study. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that DIA and FISH processing of EUS-guided FNA specimens provides higher diagnostic accuracy than RC does. These data suggest that these tumor markers incorporate generic targets as suggested by the high diagnostic sensitivity in this patient cohort with diverse pathologic conditions.     

Real-time endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration is useful for diagnosing sarcoidosis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Several studies of real-time endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS)-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA) have reported a sensitivity of approximately 90% in the diagnosis of mediastinal and hilar malignancies. However, few studies have addressed its role in the diagnosis of sarcoidosis. The aim of the present study was to assess the utility of EBUS-TBNA in confirming a pathological diagnosis of sarcoidosis. METHODS: Fifteen consecutive patients with suspected sarcoidosis and mediastinal and/or hilar lymphadenopathy were investigated prospectively. EBUS-TBNA with an echo-bronchoscope and a dedicated echogenic 22-gauge needle was carried out in patients under conscious sedation, followed by conventional TBNA of the same lesion using a 19-gauge needle. RESULTS: EBUS-TBNA and/or TBNA demonstrated non-caseating epithelioid cell granulomas in 14 of 15 patients (93%). All 14 patients with a pathological diagnosis of sarcoidosis were considered to have sarcoidosis based on subsequent clinical assessments. The single patient with a negative EBUS-TBNA and TBNA had a malignant melanoma diagnosed following surgical biopsy. EBUS-TBNA confirmed a diagnosis of sarcoidosis in 13 of the 14 patients (93%) by identifying non-caseating epithelioid cell granulomas in 18 of 23 lymph nodes (78%) sampled. When two needle aspirates of one or two lymph nodes were carried out, the percentage positive pathological diagnosis for sarcoidosis for (i) EBUS-TBNA; (ii) TBNA; and (iii) the combination of EBUS-TBNA and TBNA were 93% (13 of 14 patients), 93% (13 of 14 patients) and 100% (14 of 14 patients), respectively. There were no complications associated with the procedures. CONCLUSION: EBUS-TBNA is less invasive and acceptably sensitive as a method for obtaining pathological confirmation of sarcoidosis.     

EUS-guided FNA for the diagnosis of gallbladder masses

BACKGROUND: Gallbladder masses can be identified endosongraphically, but FNA for cytologic diagnosis is not routine. This is a review of our experience with EUS-guided FNA of gallbladder masses. METHODS: Records of patients undergoing EUS were reviewed to identify cases in which FNA of the gallbladder was performed. Reports of EUS procedures, EUS images, cytology results, and clinical records were reviewed. OBSERVATIONS: Six cases were identified. The final diagnosis was gallbladder carcinoma in 5 and xanthogranulomatous cholecystitis in one. In each case, EUS revealed a hypoechoic mass within the gallbladder wall or gallbladder lumen. Gallbladder wall calcification was observed in 3 of the 5 cases of carcinoma. FNA yielded a specimen that was positive (n = 3) or raised a suspicion (n = 1) for adenocarcinoma in 4 of the 5 proven malignancies. FNA of regional lymph nodes demonstrated metastatic adenocarcinoma in 2 cases. FNA was negative for malignancy in the case of xanthogranulomatous cholecystitis and one case of proven carcinoma. There were no complications. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided FNA of gallbladder masses is safe and can provide a definitive diagnosis of malignancy. Gallbladder carcinoma appears endosonographically as a hypoechoic mass and may be associated with focal wall calcifications.     

Can endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration predict response to chemoradiation in non-small cell lung cancer? A pilot study

BACKGROUND: Accurate prediction of pathologic response to chemoradiation (CHEMO-XRT) has a significant impact on the treatment of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and mediastinal lymph node (LN) metastasis (N2 disease). Objective: This pilot study evaluates the ability of EUS-FNA to predict pathologic response in LN following CHEMO-XRT in NSCLC patients with N2 disease. Patients and METHODS: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on patients with NSCLC and biopsy-proven N2 disease who underwent restaging by EUS following CHEMO-XRT. At restaging, FNA was performed on the same LN, if present, or any other visible LN in the posterior mediastinum. Response to therapy (N0 disease) was defined by either absence of mediastinal LN or residual disease on FNA. Those staged N0 by EUS underwent tumor resection with complete LN dissection. RESULTS: Fourteen patients met the criteria for evaluation. Restaging by EUS suggested disease response in 7 patients and residual disease in 6; tissue yield was unsatisfactory in 1 patient. Eleven of 14 patients in whom mediastinal LN were seen at restaging by EUS underwent FNA: the aspirate was benign in 4, residual disease was found in 6, and an inadequate sample was obtained in 1 patient. In 3 patients no mediastinal LN were evident at EUS. Final diagnosis on the 7 patients in whom EUS suggested N0 disease was established at surgery: EUS was true negative in 6 and false negative in 1. Of the 6 patients with residual disease, 5 underwent palliative CHEMO-XRT and 1 underwent extended tumor resection. The patient in whom tissue sampling was inadequate was found to have residual disease at surgery. The diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA for predicting mediastinal response to preoperative CHEMO-XRT was 86%. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-FNA appears to qualify as an accurate, safe and minimally invasive diagnostic technique for restaging of mediastinal LN after CHEMO-XRT in NSCLC patients. Given this promising preliminary data, a prospective evaluation is justified.     

EUS-guided fine needle aspiration in mediastinal lymphadenopathy of unknown etiology

BACKGROUND: EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has significantly expanded the diagnostic capability of GI EUS. FNA technology can also be helpful in the diagnosis of non-GI disorders. The role of EUS-guided FNA in the diagnosis of mediastinal lymphadenopathy of unknown etiology has not been described. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and impact on subsequent evaluation and therapy of EUS-FNA in mediastinal lymphadenopathy of unknown cause. METHODS: Sixty-two patients (40 men, 22 woman; mean age 56 years, range 16-91 years) with mediastinal lymphadenopathy of unknown etiology underwent EUS-FNA at 6 tertiary referral centers. Presenting symptoms included the following: dysphagia, 6 patients; night sweats, 14; cough, 8; chest pain, 10; odynophagia, 10; fever, 6; weight loss, 8; and asymptomatic/abnormal radiograph, 12. A final diagnosis by EUS-FNA, surgery, autopsy, or long-term follow-up was available for all patients. EUS-FNA results were classified under 3 disease categories: (1) benign/infectious; (2) malignant pulmonary; and (3) malignant mediastinal (e.g., lymphoma, metastatic malignancy). Four EUS features were used as criteria for lymph node metastases: size greater than 1 cm, round shape, sharp border, and homogeneous/hypoechoic echo pattern. RESULTS: Final diagnoses included benign/infectious lymph nodes, 26; malignant pulmonary, 24; and malignant mediastinal, 12. EUS-FNA established a tissue diagnosis in 56 of 62 patients (90%). EUS criteria for malignant lymph nodes were more frequently present in malignant pulmonary (mean 2.6 features) and malignant mediastinal (mean 2.8) than benign/infectious (mean 1.9) lymph nodes. EUS results influenced subsequent evaluation in 87% and therapy in 87% of patients. There was no complication of EUS-FNA. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-FNA in patients with mediastinal lymphadenopathy is safe and guides subsequent therapy in the great majority of cases. Transesophageal EUS-FNA of mediastinal lymph nodes provides minimally invasive tissue sampling, obviating the need for mediastinoscopy or bronchoscopy.     

Comparison of 22-gauge standard fine needle versus core biopsy needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of suspected pancreatic cancer: a randomized crossover trial

Background: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is effective for tissue diagnosis of pancreatic mass. To improve diagnostic yield and drawbacks, 22-gauge (G) core biopsy (FNB) needle has been developed. This study aims to compare 22G FNA and FNB needles for EUS-guided sampling of suspected pancreatic cancer.

Methods: This is a randomized controlled crossover trial. A total of 60 patients with suspected unresectable pancreatic cancer referred for EUS-guided sampling were randomly assigned to two groups. Both groups had 22G FNA and FNB needles performed in a randomized order. The primary endpoint was the cytological, histological and overall diagnostic accuracy of pancreatic cancer.

Results: FNA and FNB needles reported similar level of diagnostic accuracy (FNA needle 95% vs. FNB needle 93.3%; p?=?.564), and it was not statistically different. However, cytological cellularity was significantly higher in the FNB needles compared to FNA needles (odds ratio 2.75, 95% confidence interval (CI)). There were no procedure-related complications in both needles.

Conclusions: The diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided sampling for pancreatic cancer using 22G FNA is comparable to FNB needles. The cytological quality of specimen is better in the FNB needle.