Pancreatic Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine Needle Aspiration: Complication rate and clinical course in a single centre

BackgroundEndoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) is effective for obtaining biopsy specimens from pancreatic lesions.AimTo determine the frequency and severity of complications after EUS-FNA of solid and cystic pancreatic lesions in a single centre large series of patients.Patients and methodsFrom January 2005 to December 2008, information on all patients referred to our unit for pancreatic EUS was systematically entered in a computer database including clinical and morphologic data. Records were reviewed to evaluate whether complications such as haemorrhage, acute pancreatitis, intestinal perforation, or others occurred after EUS-FNA of the pancreas.ResultsA total of 3296 pancreatic EUS were done in four years. In the 1034 pancreatic EUS-FNA, we observed 10 (0.96%) haemorrhages (7 intracystic, 2 in the pancreatic duct, and 1 in a small carcinoma), 2 (0.19%) acute severe pancreatitis and 1 (0.09%) duodenal perforation followed by complicated post-surgical hospitalization and death. The haemorrhages were all self-limiting. Overall, major complications (pancreatitis and perforation) arose in 0.29% of these examinations.ConclusionsEUS-FNA is safe, with a low risk of severe haemorrhage. Although rare, acute pancreatitis is generally mild or severe, requiring prolonged hospitalization. One fatal complication occurred after duodenal perforation in a patient with duodenal neuroendocrine tumour and pancreatic infiltration.     

EUS-guided reverse bevel fine-needle biopsy sampling and open tip fine-needle aspiration in solid pancreatic lesions – a prospective,comparative study

Objectives: Different diagnostic entities can present as solid pancreatic lesions (SPL). This study aimed to explore the utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided reverse bevel fine-needle biopsy sampling (EUS-FNB) in SPLs.

Material and methods: In 2012–2015, consecutive patients with SPLs were prospectively included in a tertiary center setting and subjected to dual needle sampling with a 22 gauge reverse bevel biopsy needle and a conventional 25 gauge open tip aspiration needle (EUS-FNA). The outcome measures were the diagnostic accuracy of sampling, calculated for each modality separately and for the modalities combined (EUS-FNA?+?FNB), and the adverse event rate related to sampling.

Results: In 68 unique study subjects, the most common diagnostic entities were pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor, PNET, (34%), pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, PDAC, (32%), pancreatitis (15%) and metastasis (6%). The overall diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB was not significantly different from that of EUS-FNA, (69% vs. 78%, p?=?.31). EUS-FNA?+?FNB, compared with EUS-FNA alone, had a higher sensitivity for tumors other than PDAC (89% vs. 69%, p?=?.02) but not for PDACs (95% vs. 85%, p?=?.5). No adverse event was recorded after the study dual-needle sampling procedures.

Conclusions: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition performed with a 22 gauge reverse bevel biopsy needle is safe but not superior to conventional fine-needle aspiration performed with a 25 gauge open tip needle in diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions. However, the performance of both these modalities may facilitate the diagnostic work-up in selected patients, such as cases suspicious for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors and metastases. NCT02360839.     

Sensitivity of CT,MRI, and EUS-FNA/B in the preoperative workup of histologically proven left-sided pancreatic lesions

Background and objectivesLeft-sided pancreatic lesions are often treated surgically. Accurate diagnostic work-up is therefore essential to prevent futile major abdominal surgery. Large series focusing specifically on the preoperative work-up of left-sided pancreatic lesions are lacking. This surgical cohort analysis describes the sensitivity of CT, MRI, and EUS-FNA/B in the diagnostic work-up of left-sided pancreatic lesions.MethodsWe performed a post-hoc analysis of patients who underwent surgery for a left-sided pancreatic lesion between April 2010 and August 2017 and participated in the randomized CPR trial. Primary outcome was the sensitivity of CT, MRI, and EUS-FNA/B. Sensitivity was determined as the most likely diagnosis of each modality compared with the postoperative histopathological diagnosis. Additionally, the change in sensitivity of EUS versus EUS-FNA/B (i.e., cyst fluid analysis, and/or tissue acquisition) was measured.ResultsOverall, 181 patients were included (benign: 23%, premalignant: 27%, malignant: 50%). Most patients had solid lesions (65%). Preoperative imaging included CT (86%), MRI (41%), EUS (68%). Overall, CT and EUS-FNA/B reached a sensitivity of both 71%, compared with 66% for MRI. When EUS was combined with FNA/B, sensitivity rose from 64% to 71%. For solid lesions, CT reached the highest sensitivity (75%) when compared with MRI (70%) and EUS-FNA/B (69%). For cystic lesions, EUS-FNA/B reached the highest sensitivity (75%) when compared with CT and MRI (both 62%).ConclusionsCT is the most sensitive diagnostic modality for solid and EUS-FNA/B for cystic left-sided pancreatic lesions. EUS-FNA/B was associated with an increased sensitivity when compared to EUS alone.     

Establishment of Patient-Derived Pancreatic Cancer Organoids from Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration Biopsies

Background/AimsThree-dimensional cultures of human pancreatic cancer tissue also known as “organoids” have largely been developed from surgical specimens. Given that most patients present with locally advanced and/or metastatic disease, such organoids are not representative of the majority of patients. Therefore, we used endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) to collect pancreatic cancer tissues from patients with advanced pancreatic cancer to create organoids, and evaluated their utility in pancreatic cancer research.MethodsSingle-pass EUS-FNA samplings were employed to obtain the tissue for organoid generation. After establishment of the organoid, we compared the core biopsy tissues with organoids using hematoxylin and eosin staining, and performed whole exome sequencing (WES) to detect mutational variants. Furthermore, we compared patient outcome with the organoid drug response to determine the potential utility of the clinical application of such organoid-based assays.ResultsOrganoids were successfully generated in 14 of 20 tumors (70%) and were able to be passaged greater than 5 times in 12 of 20 tumors (60%). Among them, we selected eight pairs of organoid and core biopsy tissues for detailed analyses. They showed similar patterns in hematoxylin and eosin staining. WES revealed mutations in KRAS, TP53, CDKN2A, SMAD4, BRCA1, and BRCA2 which were 93% homologous, and the mean nonreference discordance rate was 5.47%. We observed moderate drug response correlations between the organoids and clinical outcomes in patients who underwent FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy.ConclusionsThe established organoids from EUS-FNA core biopsies can be used for a suitable model system for pancreatic cancer research.     

EUS-guided fine needle aspiration and trucut needle biopsy for examination of rectal and perirectal lesions

Abstract

Objective. Few studies have assessed the diagnostic efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and/or trucut biopsy (TCB) in patients with rectal and perirectal lesions. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic utility of EUS-FNA and/or TCB in patients with rectal and perirectal lesions. We also assessed their influence on the management and clinical course of these patients. Material and methods. We performed EUS-FNA and/or TCB in 11 consecutive patients (4 men and 7 women, 33–69 years) with rectal and perirectal lesions for whom conventional diagnostic tools could not provide definitive diagnoses. Patients with definite intraluminal cancer were excluded. Results. The 11 patients underwent 12 procedures, with 9 being EUS-FNA alone and 3 being EUS-FNA and TCB. Seven patients had rectal lesions and four had perirectal lesions. Initial EUS-FNA and/or TCB established a diagnosis of malignancy in five patients and of benign lesions in four. EUS-FNA plus TCB confirmed malignant lymphoma after diagnostic failure of initial EUS-FNA in one patient. In one other patient with suspicious secondary linitis plastica, EUS-FNA could not establish a definitive diagnosis. Correct diagnoses were obtained in 10 out of 11 patients who underwent EUS-FNA and/or TCB. EUS-FNA and/or TCB changed clinical courses, which included avoidance of unnecessary surgeries, having a chance of anal sphincter-saving surgeries, and timely administration of chemotherapy. No serious complications related to the use of EUS-FNA or TCB were evident. Conclusion. EUS-FNA and/or TCB are useful in the diagnostic evaluation of and appropriate therapeutic plan in patients with rectal and perirectal lesions.     

Factors Predictive of Adverse Events Associated with Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration of Pancreatic Solid Lesions

Background

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) provides high diagnostic accuracy with a low incidence of procedural complications. However, it occasionally causes serious complications, and factors that increase the susceptibility to such adverse events remain unknown.

Aims

We aimed to examine post-procedural events and determine risk factors associated with EUS-FNA of pancreatic solid lesions.

Methods

This single-center retrospective study included 316 consecutive patients with pancreatic solid lesions who underwent 327 EUS-FNA procedures from April 2003 to September 2011. We registered all patients undergoing EUS-FNA in the database and retrospectively ascertained the presence/absence of post-procedural adverse events.

Results

The incidence of post-procedural adverse events, including moderate to mild pancreatitis, mild abdominal pain, and mild bleeding, was 3.4 %. Univariate analysis showed that the incidence of post-procedural events was significantly increased in patients with tumors less than or equal to 20 mm in diameter (P < 0.001), those with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNET) (P = 0.012), and patients who had intervening normal pancreas for accessing the lesion (P = 0.048). Multivariate analysis identified tumors measuring less than or equal to 20 mm in diameter (OR 18.48; 95 % CI 3.55–96.17) and case of PNETs (OR 36.50; 95 % CI 1.73–771.83) were an independent risk factors.

Conclusions

EUS-FNA of pancreatic solid lesions is a safe procedure. However, pancreatic lesions with small diameters and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors are important factors associated with adverse events after EUS-FNA.     

Analysis of circulating cell-free DNA after endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Background/ObjectivesRecently, increase in cell-free DNA (cfDNA) concentration or newly detected KRAS mutation after endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) biopsy were reported to be related to the occurrence of new distant metastasis. In this study, we investigated whether cfDNA concentration increased with the release of tumor components into the blood after EUS-FNA and whether its increase was related to prognosis.MethodsSixty-eight patients underwent EUS-FNA and were pathologically confirmed as having pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We measured plasma cfDNA concentration and the copy number of KRAS mutation in 68 patients and circulating tumor cells in 8 before and after EUS-FNA.ResultsThe average cfDNA concentration after EUS-FNA (672.5 ± 919.6 ng/mL) was significantly higher than that before EUS-FNA (527.7 ± 827.3 ng/mL) (P < 0.001). KRAS mutation in plasma was detected in 8 patients (11.8%), however a significant increase in cfDNA concentration after EUS-FNA was not related to the change in KRAS-mutant copy number. Minimal increase in circulating tumor cells was observed in 3 of 8 patients. New distant metastasis was observed within 286 days to initial metastasis detection in 6 of 12 patients with ≥2-fold increase in cfDNA concentration and 26 of 56 patients with <2-fold increase within 185 days. In 32 patients who underwent surgery, ≥2-fold increase in cfDNA did not affect early recurrence.ConclusionsThe increase in cfDNA concentration after EUS-FNA was not caused by tumor cell components released into blood vessels. Hence, the risk of seeding via the blood stream after EUS-FNA may need not be considered.     

The usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for the diagnosis of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors based on the World Health Organization classification

Abstract

Background. We assessed the controversial topic of using 22-gauge needles in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for the diagnosis and evaluation of Ki67 labeling indices (Ki67LI) of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNET). Methods. Thirty-eight patients with pNET who underwent EUS-FNA between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2012 were enrolled in this study. When available, the Ki67LI and WHO classifications obtained by EUS-FNA and surgical resection were compared. Results. EUS-FNA with a 22-gauge needle acquired sufficient histological sample to correctly diagnose pNET in 35 cases (92.1%). Both EUS-FNA and surgical histological specimens were available for 19 cases, and grading classes of the 2 procedures were consistent in 17 cases (89.5%) according to the WHO classification based on the Ki67LI. Tumor size was associated with a difference in the Ki67LI between the 2 procedures, although the Ki67LI was almost completely consistent for tumors less than 18 mm in size. Conclusions. EUS-FNA with a 22-gauge needle is a safe and highly accurate technique for the diagnosis of pNET. There was a clear correlation between the Ki67LI of histological specimens acquired by EUS-FNA and surgery. EUS-FNA with a 22-gauge needle is useful to predict the WHO classification of pNET.     

Elevated serum CA 19-9 in hepatic actinomycosis

Abstract

Objective. It is controversial whether endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is beneficial in all patients with suspected pancreatic cancer. The aim of this study was to assess diagnostic yield, safety and impact of EUS-FNA on management of patients with solid pancreatic mass. Material and methods. Consecutive patients undergoing EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic mass were enrolled. Gold standard for final diagnosis included histology from surgical resection. In patients without surgery, clinical evaluation methods and repeated imaging studies were used for the comparison of initial cytology and final diagnosis. Patients were followed-up prospectively focusing on subsequent treatment. Results. Among 207 enrolled patients, final diagnosis was malignant in 163 (78.6%) and benign in 44 (21.4%). The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of EUS-FNA in diagnosing pancreatic cancer were 92.6% (95% CI: 87.20–95.96), 88.6% (95% CI: 74.64–95.64) and 91.8% (95% CI: 87.24–94.81), respectively. No major and five (2.4%) minor complications occurred. Of 151 true-positive patients by EUS-FNA, 57 (37.7%) were surgically explored, of whom 28 (49.1%) underwent resection. Ten of 12 patients with false-negative cytology were explored based on detection of mass on EUS, of whom two had a delay due to false-negative cytology without curative treatment. From the whole study cohort, EUS-FNA had positive and negative impacts on subsequent management in 136 (65.7%) and 2 (0.9%) patients, respectively. Conclusions. EUS-FNA provides accurate diagnosis in 92% and has positive therapeutic impact in two-thirds of patients with solid pancreatic mass. Despite negative cytology, surgical exploration is recommended in clinical suspicion for pancreatic cancer and solid mass on EUS.     

Indications and outcomes of enucleation versus formal pancreatectomy for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

BackgroundPancreatoduodenectomy (PD) or distal pancreatectomy (DP) are common procedures for patients with a pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (pNET). Nevertheless, certain patients may benefit from a pancreas-preserving resection such as enucleation (EN). The aim of this study was to define the indications and differences in long-term outcomes among patients undergoing EN and PD/DP.MethodsPatients undergoing resection of a pNET between 1992 and 2016 were identified. Indications and outcomes were evaluated, and propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to compare long-term outcomes between patients who underwent EN versus PD/DP.ResultsAmong 1034 patients, 143 (13.8%) underwent EN, 304 (29.4%) PD, and 587 (56.8%) DP. Indications for EN were small size (1.5 cm, IQR:1.0–1.9), functional tumors (58.0%) that were mainly insulinomas (51.7%). After PSM (n = 109 per group), incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) grade B/C was higher after EN (24.5%) compared with PD/DP (14.0%) (p = 0.049). Median recurrence-free survival (RFS) was comparable among patients who underwent EN (47 months, 95% CI:23–71) versus PD/DP (37 months, 95% CI: 33–47, p = 0.480).ConclusionComparable long-term outcomes were noted among patients who underwent EN versus PD/DP for pNET. The incidence of clinically significant POPF was higher after EN.     

Influence of the safety and diagnostic accuracy of preoperative endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for resectable pancreatic cancer on clinical performance

AIM:To evaluate the safety and diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration(EUS-FNA)in a cohort of pancreatic cancer patients.METHODS:Of 213 patients with pancreatic cancer evaluated between April 2007 and August 2011,82were thought to have resectable pancreatic cancer on the basis of cross-sectional imaging findings.Of these,54 underwent EUS-FNA before surgery(FNA+group)and 28 underwent surgery without preoperative EUSFNA(FNA-group).RESULTS:All 54 lesions were visible on EUS,and all54 attempts at FNA were technically successful.The diagnostic accuracy according to cytology and histology findings was 98.1%(53/54)and 77.8%(42/54),respectively,and the total accuracy was 98.1%(53/54).One patient developed mild pancreatitis after EUS-FNA but was successfully treated by conservative therapy.No severe complications occurred after EUS-FNA.In the FNA+and FNA-groups,the median relapse-free survival(RFS)was 742 and 265 d,respectively(P=0.0099),and the median overall survival(OS)was1042 and 557 d,respectively(P=0.0071).RFS and OS were therefore not inferior in the FNA+group.These data indicate that the use of EUS-FNA did not influence RFS or OS,nor did it increase the risk of peritoneal recurrence.CONCLUSION:In patients with resectable pancreatic cancer,preoperative EUS-FNA is a safe and accurate diagnostic method.     

Factors Determining Diagnostic Yield of Endoscopic Ultrasound Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration for Pancreatic Cystic Lesions: A Multicentre Asian Study

Background and Aim

The purpose of this study was to determine (1) the diagnostic yield for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in patients with pancreatic cystic lesions, (2) additional value of EUS-FNA over EUS alone in the diagnosis of pancreatic cysts, and (3) diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of EUS and EUS-FNA in the subset of patients where histopathology of surgical specimens were available.

Methods

All patients who underwent EUS examination for the evaluation of pancreatic cystic lesions in six Asian centres were included in the study.

Results

Of 298 patients with pancreatic cysts who underwent EUS, 132 (44.3 %) underwent FNA. In the entire cohort, pseudocysts and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) were the predominant cystic lesions. The cytologic yield of EUS-FNA was 47 %. On univariate analysis, factors associated with higher cytologic yield included vascular involvement on EUS, presence of solid cystic component, and increased number of needle passes during EUS-FNA. On multivariate analysis, presence of solid cystic components and increased number of needle passes during EUS-FNA were associated with higher diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA. For pancreatic cysts with a solid component, the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA increased significantly from 44 % with one pass to 78 % with more than one pass (p = 0.016). In the absence of a solid component, the diagnostic yield was 29 % with one pass and was not significantly different from the diagnostic yield of 50 % with more than one pass, p = 0.081.

Conclusion

The cytologic yield of EUS-FNA was 47 %. When a solid component was present in the cyst, doing more than one pass during EUS-FNA increased its diagnostic yield.     

Efficacy of endoscopic ultrasonography and endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration for the diagnosis and grading of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

Background and aim: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) are histologically categorized according to the WHO 2010 classification by their mitotic index or Ki-67 index as G1, G2, or G3. The present study examined the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in the diagnosis and grading of pNET. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 61 pNETs in 51 patients who underwent EUS between January 2007 and June 2014. All lesions were pathologically diagnosed by surgical resection or EUS-FNA. We evaluated the detection rates of EUS for pNET and sensitivity of EUS-FNA, and compared the Ki-67 index between EUS-FNA samples and surgical specimens. EUS findings were compared between G1 and G2/G3 tumors. Results: EUS showed significantly higher sensitivity (96.7%) for identifying pNET than CT (85.2%), MRI (70.2%), and ultrasonography (75.5%). The sensitivity of EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of pNET was 89.2%. The concordance rate of WHO classification between EUS-FNA and surgical specimens was 69.2% (9/13). The concordance rate was relatively high (87.5%, 5/6) in tumors?<20?mm but lower (57.1%; 4/7) in tumors?≥20?mm. Regarding EUS findings, G2/G3 tumors were more likely to be large (>20?mm), heterogeneous, and have main pancreatic duct (MPD) obstruction than G1 tumors. Multivariate analysis showed large diameter and MPD obstruction were significantly associated with G2/G3 tumors. Conclusions: EUS and EUS-FNA are highly sensitive and accurate diagnostic methods for pNET. Characteristic EUS findings such as large tumor size and MPD obstruction are suggestive of G2/G3 tumors and would be helpful for grading pNETs.     

Outcomes of pancreatectomy with portomesenteric venous resection and reconstruction for locally advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms

BackgroundWhile pancreatectomy with portomesenteric venous resection and reconstruction is commonly performed for locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma, little is known regarding outcomes for pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (panNENs).MethodsPatients who underwent non-parenchyma-sparing pancreatectomy for panNENs at Mayo Clinic from 2000 to 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Propensity score matching was performed and patient characteristics and outcomes compared.ResultsOf 867 eligible patients, 41 (4.7%) required vascular resection, including 38 patients who underwent portomesenteric venous resection only. Of these, 23 underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy or total pancreatectomy and 15 distal pancreatectomy. Patients who required portomesenteric venous resection had larger tumors, higher tumor grade, and higher disease stage. After propensity score matching to patients undergoing standard resection, the portomesenteric venous resection group had longer operative times, greater blood loss, and higher transfusion rates. While portomesenteric venous thrombosis was more common after venous resection, major complication rates and perioperative mortality were similar between the two groups, as were 5-year overall and progression-free survival.ConclusionFor patients with locally advanced panNENs, pancreatectomy with portomesenteric venous resection and reconstruction can be performed in selected patients at high-volume centers with acceptable perioperative morbidity and short- and long-term survival.     

Predictors of malignancy and recommended follow-up for patients with negative endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of suspected pancreatic lesions

BACKGROUND:

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) with fine-needle aspiration (FNA) can characterize and diagnose pancreatic lesions as malignant, but cannot definitively rule out the presence of malignancy. Outcome data regarding the length of follow-up in patients with negative or nondiagnostic EUS-FNA of pancreatic lesions are not well-established.

OBJECTIVE:

To determine the long-term outcome and provide follow-up guidance for patients with negative EUS-FNA diagnosis of suspected pancreatic lesions based on imaging predictors.

METHODS:

A retrospective review of patients undergoing EUS-FNA for suspected pancreatic lesions, but with negative or nondiagnostic FNA results was conducted at a tertiary care referral medical centre. Patient demographics, EUS imaging characteristics and follow-up data were examined.

RESULTS:

Seventeen of 55 patients (30.9%) with negative/nondiagnostic FNA were subsequently diagnosed with pancreatic malignancy. The risk of cancer was significantly higher for patients who had associated lymph nodes on EUS (P<0.001) and vascular involvement on EUS (P=0.001). The mean time to diagnosis in the group with false-negative EUS-FNA diagnosis was 66 days. The true-negative EUS-FNA patients were followed for a mean of 403 days after negative EUS-FNA results without the development of malignancy.

CONCLUSION:

For patients undergoing EUS-FNA for a suspected pancreatic lesion, a negative or nondiagnostic FNA does not provide conclusive evidence for the absence of cancer. Patients for whom vascular invasion and lymphadenopathy are detected on EUS are more likely to have a true malignant lesion and should be followed closely. When a patient has been monitored for six months or more with no cancer being diagnosed, there appears to be much less chance that a pancreatic malignancy is present.     

Rendimiento diagnóstico de la punción mediante ultrasonografía endoscópica de las lesiones quísticas del páncreas

IntroductionDespite advances in imaging techniques, in many cases they are insufficient to establish the diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesions (PCL). There are few publications in our setting that evaluate the combination of several methods obtained by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). The aim of the study was to evaluate the overall utility of EUS-FNA in the diagnosis of PCL.Material and methodsRetrospective study based on a database updated prospectively of a cohort of patients referred for EUS-FNA due to PCL detected in an imaging test. The sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic yield of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), cytology and viscosity were studied to detect mucinous lesions.ResultsFrom November 2013 to April 2018, 122 EUS were performed for PCL. EUS-FNA was performed in 94/122 (77%) and 21/122 (17.2%) patients were operated on. We included 33/122 patients who had diagnostic confirmation by histology, imaging (serous cyst with typical pattern) or clinical evolution. The study of the ROC curve determined the cutoff point ≥419 ng/ml to differentiate mucinous/non-mucinous cystic lesions. The diagnostic yield of CEA was 87.5% (21/24), cytology 81.8% (27/33) and viscosity 84.4% (27/32). The three parameters in combination obtained the best result (30/33, 90.9%).ConclusionThe combination of CEA analysis, cytology and viscosity of pancreatic fluid obtained by EUS-FNA increases the performance in the diagnosis of mucinous pancreatic cystic lesions, with it being greater than 90%.     

Clinical utility of directional eFLOW compared with contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasound for assessing the vascularity of pancreatic and peripancreatic masses

BackgroundContrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasound (CEH-EUS) can be used for the differential diagnosis of pancreatic lesions by evaluating microvascular circulation and patterns of contrast enhancement. However, routine use of CEH-EUS is limited by its high cost, the lack of contrast agent availability and the absence of expertise with this technique. Directional eFLOW (D-eFLOW) (Aloka Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) was introduced as a new high-definition modality that detects blood flow in microvessels. Because it uses built-in functions, it entails no additional cost and reduces time for examination. The present study compared the usefulness of D-eFLOW and CEH-EUS for differential diagnosis of pancreatic and peripancreatic lesions.MethodsThis retrospective study analyzed 130 patients who underwent EUS and D-eFLOW examinations from January 2016 to March 2020 to evaluate pancreatic and peripancreatic masses.ResultsAll 130 patients underwent D-eFLOW and CEH-EUS examinations. Histological diagnoses were confirmed in 130 patients by EUS-FNA and/or surgery. D-eFLOW and CEH-EUS showed good correlation in evaluating the vascularity of pancreatic and peripancreatic tumors (Fisher's exact test, p < 0.05).ConclusionsIn evaluating the characteristics of tumorous lesions, vascularity detected by D-eFLOW showed good correlation with enhancement patterns of CEH-EUS. D-eFLOW can be considered a good alternative to CEH-EUS in diagnosing pancreatic and peripancreatic masses.     

Is EUS-FNA of solid-pseudopapillary neoplasms of the pancreas as a preoperative procedure really necessary and free of acceptable risks?

BackgroundSolid-pseudopapillary neoplasms (SPNs) of the pancreas are infrequent tumors since, as of 2014, only 2744 patients have been described. Its rarity, unclear histogenesis, pleomorphic aspect on radiology (cystic, solid or mixed) and unpredictable biological behavior with an insidious high-grade malignant potential make SPN difficult to recognize preoperatively even in its target patient population which is predominantly composed of young women (about 87% of cases).MethodsEndoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) showed to improve the preoperative diagnostic yield for this tumor and obviate the risks formerly given by percutaneous biopsy.ResultsIn light of our experience, such a procedure could not be so innocuous as generally acknowledged.ConclusionWe report the first case of rupture of pancreatic SPN following EUS-FNA and entertain both the actual and potential complications ensuing from this type of mishap.     

Diagnostic accuracy and clinical impact of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Positron Emission Tomography - Computed Tomography (PET-CT)-positive mediastinal lymphadenopathies in patients with thoracic or extra-thoracic malignancies

BackgroundThe high sensitivity of PET-CT can identify hypermetabolic mediastinal adenopathies during cancer management, but specificity is low and a biopsy is sometimes required to eliminate benign adenopathies.MethodsThis prospective diagnostic accuracy study included patients with hypermetabolic mediastinal lymphadenopathies revealed on PET-CT during either the initial management of a cancer, treatment evaluation, or monitoring. All patients underwent EUS-FNA. Diagnoses of malignancy based on cytological analysis following EUS-FNA were compared with clinical and radiological follow-up information. The treatment strategy decided before the results of the EUS-FNA pathology reports (Multidisciplinary Team Meeting [MTM-1]) was recorded and compared to the treatment strategy decided once pathological data from EUS-FNA were available (MTM-2).Main findingsBetween 2013 and 2018, 75 patients were included with 47 eligible and evaluable patients. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of EUS-FNA were 93%, 100%, 100% and 90%, respectively. The concordance value between the therapeutic strategies determined for MTM-1 and MTM-2 was 44.7%. There were no significant differences in the intensity of fixation on PET-CT between malignant and benign lesions.ConclusionThe diagnostic accuracy of the minimally invasive EUS-FNA procedure is sufficiently robust to avoid the need for diagnostic surgery. The combination of PET-CT and EUS-FNA may alter the therapeutic strategy that would be considered after PET-CT alone.REGISTRATIONNCT01892501     

Benefit of high negative pressure during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration with standard 22-gauge needles for pancreatic lesions: a retrospective comparative study

Objectives: Few studies are available on high negative pressure (HNP) during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). This study compared the diagnostic yield between HNP and normal negative pressure (NNP) during EUS-FNA for solid pancreatic masses.

Methods: Consecutive patients with pancreatic masses who underwent EUS-FNA using a 22-G needle with either HNP or NNP for both the first and second passes were retrospectively examined for diagnostic yield. Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) was unavailable at our center. The main outcome measures were the number of passes, diagnostic accuracy and quantity of histological samples.

Results: Two hundred patients underwent EUS-FNA (n?=?97, HNP; n?=?103, NNP) over a 22-month period. A significantly lower median number of passes was required for HNP than for NNP (2 vs. 3; p?<?.001). There was no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy between the two groups. The rate of obtaining a histological sample larger than a 10× power field in length was significantly higher for HNP than for NNP (76.4% vs. 59.6%; p?=?.0019). In the multivariate analysis, a large tumor size (>20?mm) and HNP were identified as factors influencing the acquisition of a larger histological sample.

Conclusions: There was no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy between HNP and NNP. HNP required fewer passes without ROSE and was related to the acquisition of a larger histological sample. HNP may be useful when few samples are available for EUS-FNA with NNP or a larger histological sample is needed.