Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration pancreatic adenocarcinoma samples yield adequate DNA for next-generation sequencing:A cohort analysis

BACKGROUND Genetic tests are increasingly performed for the management of unresectable pancreatic cancer.For genotyping aimed samples current guidelines recommend using core specimens,although based on moderate quality evidence.However,in clinical practice among the endoscopic ultrasound(EUS) guided tissue acquisition methods,fine needle aspiration(FNA) is the most widely performed.AIM To assess the adequacy for next generation sequencing(NGS) of the DNA yielded from EUS-FNA pancreatic adenocarcinoma(PDAC) samples.METHODS Between November 2018 and December 2021,105 patients with PDAC confirmed by EUS-FNA were included in the study at our tertiary gastroenterology center.Either 22 gauge(G) or 19G FNA needles were used.One pass was dedicated to DNA extraction.DNA concentration and purity(A260/280,A260/230) were assessed by spectrophotometry.We assessed the differences in DNA parameters according to needle size and tumor characteristics(size,location) and the adequacy of the extracted DNA for NGS(defined as A260/280 ≥ 1.7,and DNA yield:≥ 10 ng for amplicon based NGS,≥ 50 ng for whole exome sequencing [WES],≥ 100 ng for whole genome sequencing [WGS]) by analysis of variance and ttest respectively.Moreover,we compared DNA purity parameters across the different DNA yield categories.RESULTS Our cohort included 49% male patients,aged 67.02 ± 8.38 years.The 22G needle was used in 71%of the cases.The DNA parameters across our samples varied as follows:DNA yield:1289 ng(inter quartile range:534.75-3101),A260/280 = 1.85(1.79-1.86),A260/230 = 2.2(1.72-2.36).DNA yield was > 10 ng in all samples and > 100 ng in 93% of them(one sample < 50 ng).There were no significant differences in the concentration and A260/280 between samples by needle size.Needle size was the only independent predictor of A260/230 which was higher in the 22G samples(P =0.038).NGS adequacy rate was 90% for 19G samples regardless of NGS type,and for 22G samples it reached 89% for WGS adequacy and 91% for WES and amplicon based NGS.Samples with DNA yield > 100 ng had significantly higher A260/280(1.89 ± 0.32 vs 1.34 ± 0.42,P = 0.013).Tumor characteristics were not corelated with the DNA parameters.CONCLUSION EUS-FNA PDAC samples yield DNA adequate for subsequent NGS.DNA amount was similar between 22G and 19G FNA needles.DNA purity parameters may vary indirectly with needle size.

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

Fine needle aspiration (FNA) is currently the standard of care for sampling pancreatic solid masses by using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS).The accuracy of the technique is reported to be high,especially if coupled with the rapid on site evaluation (ROSE),and it has a high safety profile.However,FNA presents some limitations,such as the small amount of tissue that can be collected and the inability of obtaining a core tissue with intact histological architecture,which is relevant to perform immunohistochemical analysis,molecular profiling and,therefore,targeted therapies.Moreover,the presence of the ROSE by an expert cytopathologist is very important to maximize the diagnostic yield of FNA technique;however,it is not widely available,especially in small centers.Hence,the introduction of EUS fine needle biopsy (FNB) with a new generation of needles,which show a high safety profile too and a satisfying diagnostic accuracy even in the absence of ROSE,could be the key to overcome the limitations of FNA.However,FNB has not yet shown diagnostic superiority over FNA.Considering all the technical aspects of FNA and FNB,the different types of needle currently available,comparisons in term of diagnostic yield,and the different techniques of sampling,a tailored approach should be used in order to determine the needle that is most appropriate for the different specific scenarios.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy-Recent topics and technical tips

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNA) is a useful procedure that enables reliable pathological diagnoses of pancreatobiliary diseases, subepithelial lesions, and swollen lymph nodes. In recent years, a pathological diagnosis based on EUS-FNA has made it possible to provide accurate treatment methods not only in these fields, but also in respiratory organs and otorhinolaryngology. This review discusses the latest topics pertaining to EUS-FNA as well as procedural tips.

Ultrasound-guided vs endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for pancreatic cancer diagnosis

AIM: To clarify the effectiveness and safety of endo- scopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer (PC). METHODS: Patients who were diagnosed with unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic PC between February 2006 and September 2011 were selected for this retrospective study. FNA biopsy for pancreatic tumors had been performed percutaneously under extracorporeal ultrasound guidance until October 2009; then, beginning in November 2009, EUS-FNA has been performed. We reviewed the complete medical records of all patients who met the selection criteria for the following data: sex, age, location and size of the targeted tumor, histological and/or cytological findings, details of puncture procedures, time from day of puncture until day of definitive diagnosis, and details of severe adverse events. RESULTS: Of the 121 patients who met the selection criteria, 46 had a percutaneous biopsy (Group A) and 75 had an EUS-FNA biopsy (Group B). Adequate cytological specimens were obtained in 42 Group A patients (91.3%) and all 75 Group B patients (P=0.0192), and histological specimens were obtained in 41 Group A patients (89.1%) and 65 Group B patients (86.7%). Diagnosis of malignancy by cytology was positive in 33 Group A patients (78.6%) and 72 Group B patients (94.6%) (P=0.0079). Malignancy by both cytology and pathology was found in 43 Group A (93.5%) and 73 Group B (97.3%) patients. The mean period from the puncture until the cytological diagnosis in Group B was 1.7 d, which was significantly shorter than that in Group A (4.1 d) (P < 0.0001). Severe adverse events were experienced in two Group A patients (4.3%) and in one Group B patient (1.3%). CONCLUSION: EUS-FNA, as well as percutaneous needle aspiration, is an effective modality to obtain cytopathological confirmation in patients with advanced PC.

Comparison of cytological and histological preparations in the diagnosis of pancreatic malignancies using endoscopic ultrasoundguided fine needle aspiration

BACKGROUND:Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration(EUS-FNA) has become a crucial diagnostic technique for pancreatic malignancies.The specimen obtained by EUS-FNA can be prepared for either cytological or histological examinations.This study was to compare diagnostic performance of cytological and histological preparations using EUSFNA in the same lesions when pancreatic malignancies were suspected.METHODS:One hundred and eighteen patients who underwent EUS-FNA for suspected pancreatic malignancies were consecutively enrolled.All procedures were conducted by a single echoendoscopist under the same conditions.Four adequate preparations were obtained by 22-gauge needles with 20 to-and-fro movements for each pass.The 4 preparations included 2 cytological and 2 histological specimens.The pathologic reviews of all specimens were conducted independently by a single experienced cytopathologist.Sensitivity,specificity,and accuracy of the 2 preparations were compared.RESULTS:The enrolled patients consisted of 62 males(52.5%),with the mean age of 64.6±10.5 years.Surgery was performed in 23(19.5%) patients.One hundred and sixteen(98.3%) lesions were classified as malignant,while 2(1.7%) were benign.Sensitivity of cytology and histology were 87.9% and 81.9%,respectively,with no significant difference(P=0.190).Accuracy was also not significantly different.Cytological preparation was more sensitive when the size of lesion was <3 cm(86.7% vs 68.9%,P=0.033).CONCLUSIONS:Our results suggested that the diagnostic performances of cytological and histological preparations are not significantly different for the diagnosis of pancreatic malignancies.However,cytological preparation might be more sensitive for pancreatic lesions <3 cm.

Can the wet suction technique change the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for diagnosing autoimmune pancreatitis type 1? A prospective single-arm study

BACKGROUND Other than surgery,endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration(EUSFNA)is the only procedure for histologically diagnosing autoimmune pancreatitis(AIP).However,adequate specimens are difficult to obtain.Recently,more adequate specimens were reported to be obtained with EUS-FNA with a wet suction technique(WEST)than with conventional EUS-FNA.AIM To histologically diagnose AIP by EUS-FNA with a WEST.METHODS Eleven patients with possible type 1 AIP between February 2016 and August 2018 underwent EUS-FNA with a WEST(WEST group),with four punctures by 19 or 22 G needles.As a historical control,23 type 1 AIP patients who underwent no fewer than four punctures with 19 or 22 G needles were enrolled(DRY group).Patient characteristics and histological findings were compared between the two groups.RESULTS Three histopathological factors according to the International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria were significantly greater in the WEST group than the DRY group[lymphoplasmacytic infiltrate without granulocytic infiltration:9(81.8%)vs 6(26.1%),P=0.003,storiform fibrosis:5(45.5%)vs 1(4.3%),P=0.008,abundant(>10 cells/HPF)IgG4-positive cells:7(63.6%)vs 5(21.7%),P=0.026].Level 1 or level 2 histopathological findings were observed more often in the WEST group than in the DRY group[8(72.7%)vs 3(13.0%),P=0.001].CONCLUSION EUS-FNA with a WEST was more successful than standard EUS-FNA in histologically diagnosing AIP.

Push vs pull method for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic head lesions: Propensity score matching analysis

AIM To evaluate the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasoundguided fine needle aspiration(EUS-FNA) of pancreatic head cancer when pushing(push method) or pulling the echoendoscope(pull method).METHODS Overall, 566 pancreatic cancer patients had their first EUS-FNA between February 2001 and December 2017. Among them, 201 who underwent EUS-FNA for pancreatic head lesions were included in this study. EUS-FNA was performed by the push method in 85 patients, the pull method in 101 patients and both the push and pull methods in 15 patients. After propensity score matching(age, sex, tumor diameter, and FNA needle), 85 patients each were stratified into the push and pull groups. Patient characteristics and EUSFNA-related factors were compared between the two groups.RESULTS Patient characteristics were not significantly different between the two groups. The distance to lesion was significantly longer in the push group than in the pull group(13.9 ± 4.9 mm vs 7.0 ± 4.9 mm, P < 0.01). The push method was a significant factor influencing the distance to lesion(≥ median 10 mm)(P < 0.01). Additionally, tumor diameter ≥ 25 mm(OR = 1.91, 95%CI: 1.02-3.58, P = 0.043) and the push method(OR = 1.91, 95%CI: 1.03-3.55, P = 0.04) were significant factors contributing to the histological diagnosis of malignancy.CONCLUSION The pull method shortened the distance between the endoscope and the lesion and facilitated EUS-FNA of pancreatic head cancer. The push method contributed to the histological diagnosis of pancreatic head cancer using EUS-FNA specimens.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology of Gastrointestinal Tract Tumors and Related Organs: Predictive Factors for Accurate Cytopathological Diagnosis

Background: Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is well-established, highly accurate clinical diagnostic test for detection and staging of gastrointestinal tract lesions and related organs. The addition of endoscopic guided fine needle aspiration cytology (EUS-FNAC) has improved the performance characteristics of EUS. Aim: Evaluate the validity of EUS-FNAC in diagnosis of gastrointestinal tract lesions and related organs and assess predictive factors for an accurate EUS-FNAC diagnosis. Methods: Our study included cytological sampling from one hundred sixty-six lesions obtained from gastrointestinal tract and related organs. Factors affecting EUS-FNA accuracy were analyzed. The histopathological results or clinical follow-up were used as the gold standard method. Results: Samples were obtained from: pancreatic masses (n = 80), gastric masses (n = 34), lymph nodes (n = 22), hepatobiliary masses (n = 18) and rectal masses (n = 2). Statistical analysis of sensitivity, specificity, Positive Predictive Value, Negative Predictive Value, and diagnostic accuracy of EUS alone was 80.4%, 51.6%, 75.8%, 76.2% and 75.9% respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of EUS-FNAC are 78.8%, 96.8%, 97.6% and 73.2% respectively. Addition of FNAC to EUS improved diagnostic accuracy to 85.5%. Positive statistical association was present between cytological adequacy and adequate cell block preparations, larger lesion size, presence of rapid on site evaluation (ROSE) and obtaining at least two passes from target lesion. Conclusions: EUS is valuable diagnostic and cost effective tool for gastrointestinal tract lesions and related organs when combined with FNAC.

Impact of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy for diagnosis of pancreatic masses

AIM： To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of histological evaluation of pancreatic tissue samples obtained by a modified method for recovering and processing the endoscopic ultrasound （EUS）-guided fine needle aspiration （FNA） material in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic solid masses. METHODS： Sixty-two consecutive patients with pancreatic masses were prospectively studied. EUS was performed by the linear scanning Pentax FG-38UX echoendoscope. Three FNAs （22G needle） were carried out during each procedure. The materials obtained with first and second punctures were processed for cytological study. Haterials of the third puncture were recovered into 10% formol solution by careful injection of saline solution through the needle, and processed for histological study. RESULTS： Length of the core specimen obtained for histological analysis was 6.5±5.3 mm （range 1-22 mm）. Cytological and histological samples were considered as adequate in 51 （82.3%） and 52 cases （83.9%）, respectively. Overall sensitivity of both pancreatic cytology and histology for diagnosis of malignancy was 68.4%. Conbary to cytology, histology was able to diagnose tumours other than adenocarcinomas, and all cases of inflammatory masses. Combination of cytology and histology allowed obtaining an adequate sample in 56 cases （90.3%）, with a global sensitivity of 84.21%, specificity of 100% and an overall accuracy of 90.32%. The complication rate was 1.6%.CONCLUSION： Adequate pancreatic core specimens for histological examination can be obtained by EUS-guided FNA. This technique is mainly useful for the diagnosis of different types of pancreatic tumours and evaluation of benign diseases.

22-gauge core vs 22-gauge aspiration needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of abdominal masses

AIM To compare the aspiration needle(AN) and core biopsy needle(PC) in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration(EUS-FNA) of abdominal masses.METHODS Consecutive patients referred for EUS-FNA were included in this prospective single-center trial. Each patient underwent a puncture of the lesion with both standard 22-gauge(G) AN(Echo Tip Ultra; Cook Medical, Bloomington, Indiana, United States) and the novel 22 G PC(Echo Tip Pro Core; Cook Medical, Bloomington, Indiana, United States) in a randomized fashion; histology was attempted in the PC group only. The main study endpoint was the overall diagnostic accuracy, including the contribution of histology to the final diagnosis. Secondary outcome measures included material adequacy, number of needle passes, and complications.RESULTS Fifty six consecutive patients(29 men; mean age 68 years) with pancreatic lesions(n = 38), lymphadenopathy(n = 13), submucosal tumors(n = 4), or others lesions(n = 1) underwent EUS-FNA using both of the needles in a randomized order. AN and PC reached similar overall results for diagnostic accuracy(AN: 88.9 vs PC: 96.1, P = 0.25), specimen adequacy(AN: 96.4% vs PC: 91.1%, P = 0.38), mean number of passes(AN: 1.5 vs PC: 1.7, P = 0.14), mean cellularity score(AN: 1.7 vs PC: 1.1, P = 0.058), and complications(none). A diagnosis on the basis of histology was achieved in the PC group in 36(64.3%) patients, and in 2 of those as the sole modality. In patients with available histology the mean cellularity score was higher for AN(AN: 1.7 vs PC: 1.0, P = 0.034); no other differences were of statistical significance.CONCLUSION Both needles achieved high overall diagnostic yields and similar performance characteristics for cytological diagnosis; histological analysis was only possible in 2/3 of cases with the new needle.

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

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

Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration vs fine needle biopsy in solid lesions:A multi-center analysis

BACKGROUND While endoscopic ultrasound(EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration(FNA)is considered a preferred technique for tissue sampling for solid lesions,fine needle biopsy(FNB)has recently been developed.AIM To compare the accuracy of FNB vs FNA in determining the diagnosis of solid lesions.METHODS A retrospective,multi-center study of EUS-guided tissue sampling using FNA vs FNB needles.Measured outcomes included diagnostic test characteristics(i.e.,sensitivity,specificity,accuracy),use of rapid on-site evaluation(ROSE),and adverse events.Subgroup analyses were performed by type of lesion and diagnostic yield with or without ROSE.A multivariable logistic regression was also performed.RESULTS A total of 1168 patients with solid lesions(n=468 FNA;n=700 FNB)underwent EUS-guided sampling.Mean age was 65.02±12.13 years.Overall,sensitivity,specificity and accuracy were superior for FNB vs FNA(84.70%vs 74.53%;99.29%vs 96.62%;and 87.62%vs 81.55%,respectively;P<0.001).On subgroup analyses,sensitivity,specificity,and accuracy of FNB alone were similar to FNA+ROSE[(81.66%vs 86.45%;P=0.142),(100%vs 100%;P=1.00)and(88.40%vs 85.43%;P=0.320].There were no difference in diagnostic yield of FNB alone vs FNB+ROSE(P>0.05).Multivariate analysis showed no significant predictor for better accuracy.On subgroup analyses,FNB was superior to FNA for non-pancreatic lesions;however,there was no difference between the techniques among pancreatic lesions.One adverse event was reported in each group.CONCLUSION FNB is superior to FNA with equivalent diagnostic test characteristics compared to FNA+ROSE in the diagnosis of non-pancreatic solid lesions.Our results suggest that EUS-FNB may eliminate the need of ROSE and should be employed as a first-line method in the diagnosis of solid lesions.

Contrast-enhanced guided endoscopic ultrasound procedures

Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound(CH-EUS)can overcome the limi-tations of endoscopic ultrasound-guided acquisition by identifying microvessels inside inhomogeneous tumours and improving the characterization of these tumours.Despite the initial enthusiasm that oriented needle sampling under CH-EUS guidance could provide better diagnostic yield in pancreatic solid lesions,further studies did not confirm the supplementary values in cases of tissue acquisition guided by CH-EUS.This review details the knowledge based on the available data on contrast-guided procedures.The indications for CH-EUS tissue acquisition include isoechoic EUS lesions with poor visible delineation where CH-EUS can differentiate the lesion vascularisation from the surrounding parenchyma and also the mural nodules within biliopancreatic cystic lesions,which occur in select cases.Additionally,the roles of CH-EUS-guided therapy in patients whose pancreatic fluid collections or bile ducts that have an echogenic content have indications for drainage,and patients who have nonvisualized vessels that need to be highlighted via Doppler EUS are presented.Another indication is represented if there is a need for an immediate assessment of the post-radiofrequency ablation of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours,in which case CH-EUS can be used to reveal the incomplete tumour destruction.

Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration:Technique and applications in clinical practice

Since its initial report in 1992,endoscopic ultrasoundguided fine needle aspiration(EUS-FNA) has now been incorporated into the diagnostic and staging algorithm for the evaluation of benign and malignant diseases of the gastrointestinal tract and of adjacent organs.Its introduction constitutes a major breakthrough in the endoscopic field and has gradually transformed EUS from a pure imaging modality into a more interventional procedure.In addition,the possibility of collecting samples,providing a definitive cytological and/or histological evidence of the presence of malignancy,has strongly contributed to changing EUS from a subjective,highly operator dependant procedure into a more objective one.This article will review the instrumentation,technique and the most important clinical applications of EUS-FNA.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle tissue acquisition:Where we stand in 2013?

Since its introduction,endoscopic ultrasound(EUS)guided fine needle aspiration and fine needle biopsy have become an indispensable tool for the diagnosis of lesions within the gastrointestinal tract and surrounding organs.It has proved to be an effective diagnostic method with high accuracy and low complication rates.Several factors can influence the accuracy and the diagnostic yield of this procedure including experience of the endosonographer,availability of onsite cytopathology services,the method of cytopathology preparation,the location and physical characteristics of the lesion,sampling techniques and the type and size of the needle used.In this review we will outline the recent studies evaluating EUS-guided tissue acquisition and will provide practical recommendations to maximize tissue yield.

Percutaneous ultrasound and endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions: An analysis of 1074 lesions

Backgrounds:Percutaneous ultrasound(US)and endoscopic ultrasound(EUS)-guided pancreatic biopsies are widely accepted in the diagnosis of pancreatic diseases.Studies comparing the diagnostic performance of US-and EUS-guided pancreatic biopsies are lacking.This study aimed to evaluate and compare the diagnostic yields of US-and EUS-guided pancreatic biopsies and identify the risk factors for inconclusive biopsies.Methods:Of the 1074 solid pancreatic lesions diagnosed from January 2017 to February 2021 in our center,275 underwent EUS-guided fine needle aspiration(EUS-FNA),and 799 underwent US-guided core needle biopsy(US-CNB/FNA).The outcomes were inconclusive pathological biopsy,diagnostic accuracy and the need for repeat biopsy.All of the included factors and diagnostic performances of both USCNB/FNA and EUS-FNA were compared,and the independent predictors for the study outcomes were identified.Results:The diagnostic accuracy was 89.8%for EUS-FNA and 95.2%for US-CNB/FNA(P=0.001).Biopsy under EUS guidance[odds ratio(OR)=1.808,95%confidence interval(CI):1.083-3.019;P=0.024],lesion size<2 cm(OR=2.069,95%CI:1.145-3.737;P=0.016),hypoechoic appearance(OR=0.274,95%CI:0.097-0.775;P=0.015)and non-pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma carcinoma(PDAC)diagnosis(OR=2.637,95%CI:1.563-4.449;P<0.001)were identified as factors associated with inconclusive pathological biopsy.Hypoechoic appearance(OR=0.236,95%CI:0.064-0.869;P=0.030),lesions in the uncinate process of the pancreas(OR=3.506,95%CI:1.831-6.713;P<0.001)and non-PDAC diagnosis(OR=2.622,95%CI:1.278-5.377;P=0.009)were independent predictors for repeat biopsy.Biopsy under EUS guidance(OR=2.024,95%CI:1.195-3.429;P=0.009),lesions in the uncinate process of the pancreas(OR=1.776,95%CI:1.014-3.108;P=0.044)and hypoechoic appearance(OR=0.127,95%CI:0.047-0.347;P<0.001)were associated with diagnostic accuracy.Conclusions:In conclusion,both percutaneous US-and EUS-guided biopsies of solid pancreatic lesions are safe and effective;though the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA is inferior to US-CNB/FNA.A tailored pancreatic biopsy should be considered a part of the management algorithm for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic disease.

Improved diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound-fine needle biopsy with histology specimen processing

BACKGROUND Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy(EUS-FNB)has emerged as a safe,efficacious alternative to fine needle aspiration(FNA)for tissue acquisition.EUS-FNB is reported to have higher diagnostic yield while preserving specimen tissue architecture.However,data on the optimal method of EUS-FNB specimen processing is limited.AIM To evaluate EUS-FNB with specimen processing as histology vs EUS-FNA cytology with regards to diagnostic yield and specimen adequacy.METHODS All EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB performed at our institution from July 1,2016,to January 31,2018,were retrospectively analyzed.We collected data on demographics,EUS findings,pathology,clinical outcomes,and procedural complications in two periods,July 2016 through March 2017,and April 2017 through January 2018,with predominant use of FNB in the second data collection time period.FNA specimens were processed as cytology with cell block technique and reviewed by a cytopathologist;FNB specimens were fixed in formalin,processed for histopathologic analysis and immunohistochemical staining,and reviewed by an anatomic pathologist.Final diagnosis was based on surgical pathology when available,repeat biopsy or imaging,and length of clinical follow up.RESULTS One hundred six EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB procedures were performed.FNA alone was performed in 17 patients;in 56 patients,FNB alone was done;and in 33 patients,both FNA and FNB were performed.For all indications,diagnostic yield was 47.1%(8/17)in FNA alone cases,85.7%(48/56)in FNB alone cases,and 84.8%(28/33)in cases where both FNA and FNB were performed(P=0.0039).Specimens were adequate for pathologic evaluation in 52.9%(9/17)of FNA alone cases,in 89.3%(50/56)of FNB alone cases,and 84.8%(28/33)in cases where FNA with FNB were performed(P=0.0049).Tissue could not be aspirated for cytology in 10.0%(5/50)of cases where FNA was done,while in 3.4%(3/89)of FNB cases,tissue could not be obtained for histology.In patients who underwent FNA with FNB,there was a statistically significant difference in both specimen adequacy(P=0.0455)and diagnostic yield(P=0.0455)between the FNA and FNB specimens(processed correspondingly as cytology or histology).CONCLUSION EUS-FNB has a higher diagnostic yield and specimen adequacy than EUS-FNA.In our experience,specimen processing as histology may have contributed to the overall increased diagnostic yield of EUS-FNB.

Endoscopic ultrasound-through-the-needle biopsy in pancreatic cystic lesions: A large single center experience

BACKGROUND Establishing a diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesions(PCLs)preoperatively still remains challenging.Recently,endoscopic ultrasound(EUS)-through-the-needle biopsy(EUS-TTNB)using microforceps in PCLs has been made available.AIM To assess the efficacy and safety of EUS-TTNB in the diagnosis of PCLs.METHODS We retrospectively collected data of patients with PCLs who underwent both EUS-fine-needle aspiration(FNA)for cytology and EUS-TTNB at our institution since 2016.EUS-FNA for cytology was followed by EUS-TTNB in the same session.Evaluation of the cyst location,primary diagnosis,adverse events,and comparison between the cytologic fluid analyses and histopathology was performed.Technical success of EUS-TTNB was defined as visible tissue present after biopsy.Clinical success was defined as the presence of a specimen adequate to make a histologic or cytologic diagnosis.RESULTS A total of 56 patients(mean age 66.9±11.7,53.6%females)with PCLs were enrolled over the study period.The mean cyst size was 28.8 mm(12-85 mm).The EUS-TTNB procedure was technically successful in all patients(100%).The clinical success rate using EUS-TTNB was much higher than standard EUS-FNA,respectively 80.4%(45/56)vs 25%(14/56).Adverse events occurred in 2 patients(3.6%)who developed mild pancreatitis that resolved with medical therapy.Using TTNB specimens,23 of 32 cases(71.9%)with intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm were further differentiated into gastric type(19 patients)and pancreaticobiliary type(4 patients)based on immunochemical staining.CONCLUSION EUS-TTNB for PCLs was technically feasible and had a favorable safety profile.Furthermore,the diagnostic yield for PCLs was much higher with EUS-TTNB than standard EUS-FNA cytology and fluid carcinoembryonic antigen.EUSTTNB should be considered as an adjunct to EUS-FNA and cytologic analysis in the diagnosis and management of PCLs.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided liver biopsy: Recent evidence

Liver biopsy(LB)is an essential tool in diagnosing,evaluating and managing various diseases of the liver.As such,histopathological results are critical as they establish or aid in diagnosis,provide information on prognosis,and guide the appropriate selection of medical therapy for patients.Indications for LB include evaluation of persistent elevation of liver chemistries of unclear etiology,diagnosis of chronic liver diseases such as Wilson's disease,autoimmune hepatitis,small duct primary sclerosing cholangitis,work up of fever of unknown origin,amyloidosis and more.Traditionally,methods of acquiring liver tissue have included percutaneous LB(PCLB),transjugular LB(TJLB)or biopsy taken surgically via laparotomy or laparoscopy.However,traditional methods of LB may be inferior to newer methods.Additionally,PCLB and TJLB carry higher risks of adverse events and complications.More recently,endoscopic ultrasound guided LB(EUS-LB)has evolved as an alternative method of tissue sampling that has proven to be safe and effective,with limited adverse events.Compared to PC and TJ routes,EUS-LB may also have a greater diagnostic yield of tissue,be superior for a targeted approach of focal lesions,provide higher quality images and allow for greater patient comfort.These advantages have contributed to the increased use of EUS-LB as a technique for obtaining liver tissue.Herein,we provide a review of the recent evidence of EUS-LB for liver disease.

Hypercalcemic crisis due to a mediastinal parathyroid cyst diagnosed by ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration

Hypercalcemic crisis, generally accepted as serum calcium concentration greater than 3.5 mmol/L,constitues a life-threatening endocrinologic emergency,and is most frequently caused by either primary hyperparathyroidism （PHPT） or malignant diseases.Parathyroid cysts are uncommon lesions, most of that are located in the low part of the neck. By routine neck ultrasound scan investigation in a large series of 6621 patients, only 5 parathyroid cysts were detected, yielding a prevalence of 0.075% in setting of unselected patients.The parathyroid cysts in the mediastinum are much less frequently encountered, with only 106 cases reported in English literature.2,3 Moreover, less than half of these cases presented as functional with elevated serum calcium and parathyroid hormone, and only 10 cases were associated with hypercalcemic crisis.3 Herein, we present a rare case of mediastinal parathyroid cyst associated with recurrent hypercalcemic crisis, which diagnosed by ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration （FNA）.