Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine-needle Aspiration Results Research Articles

EUS-FNA Biopsy for Pancreatic Mass.

To assess both solid and cystic pancreatic lesions using endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and the effect of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in patient management. Descriptive study. Place and Duration of the Study: Department of Gastroenterology, Division of Internal Diseases, Sivas Cumhuriyet University Hospital, Sivas, Turkiye, from January 2018 to 2022. Patients with pancreatic mass, who underwent EUS-FNA were inducted in the study. EUS-FNA was performed using a 22-gauge needle via both transgastric and transduodenal routes. The size of the pancreatic lesion, its location, and whether there was SMA or CA invasion were evaluated on CT and EUS scans. Biopsy results of 64 patients who received EUS-FNA due to pancreatic lesions were considered. The results were divided into malignancy or benign pathology. A total of 64 cases were compared. Crosstable Chi-square analysis showed a statistically significant difference between CT and EUS (p <0.001). EUS-FNA results revealed that out of the 64 patients with pancreatic mass detected in EUS, 46 had adenocarcinoma, 7 were negative for malignancy, 4 had intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia (IPMN), 3 had neuroendocrine tumour (NET), 2 had lymphoma, and 2 had solid pseudopapillary neoplasia (SPN). In the 2-year follow-up of the seven patients who were negative for malignancy in EUS-FNA, there were no clinical, laboratory or imaging findings indicating pancreatic malignancy or distant metastasis. Tissue sampling through EUS-FNA has minimal side effects and remains useful in managing preoperative patients with resectable or suspicious pancreatic masses. Pancreatic cancer, Abdominal CT, Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), Ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA).

Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in the Diagnosis of Suspicious Malignant Esophageal Strictures.

(1) Background: The accurate diagnosis of esophageal strictures is quite critical for optimizing medical intervention. However, the diagnosis of suspicious malignant esophageal strictures with intact mucosa appearance and negative biopsy results is challenging. This study aimed to evaluate the role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in the diagnosis of suspicious esophageal strictures. (2) Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the cases with suspicious malignant esophageal strictures that underwent EUS-FNA, with or without rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE), in our hospital from April 2017 to September 2022. Their clinical manifestations, imaging examinations, gastroscopic examinations, EUS-FNA results, and therapeutic strategies were retrospectively recorded and analyzed. (3) Results: A total of 23 patients (15 male and 8 female) were enrolled in this study. Based on EUS-FNA results, 18 patients were diagnosed with malignancies, including 16 cases of primary esophageal cancer (13 squamous carcinomas and 3 adenocarcinomas), 1 case of mediastinal cancer, and 1 case of metastatic esophageal cancer; 1 case of tuberculosis was also confirmed by EUS-FNA. Among 4 cases of ambiguous diagnosis with EUS-FNA, 1 was diagnosed with an esophageal glomus tumor after surgical removal, and 2 patients survived for several years without medical intervention, which hinted at the possibility of benign esophageal strictures. No major complications, including bleeding or perforation, were observed. (4) Conclusions: EUS-FNA may serve as a safe and effective diagnostic tool in suspicious malignant esophageal strictures with accurate specimen acquisition, especially for biopsy-negative cases.

Tissue Sampling through Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration versus Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatographic Brushing Cytology Technique in Suspicious Malignant Biliary Stricture.

BACKGROUND Differentiation of benign and malignant biliary strictures plays a pivotal role in managing biliary strictures. Brush cytology via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) are two diagnostic methods. In the present study, we aimed to compare the accuracy of the results of EUS-FNA and ERCP-based sampling of biliary strictures. METHODS In a prospective study, between January 2019 and March 2020, patients with indeterminate biliary strictures who had no history of hepatobiliary surgery, opium usage, cancer of pancratobiliary system, and acute liver disease were selected. They underwent EUS and ERCP in the same session. They were followed up for 6 months, and the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy of these imaging modalities were compared. RESULTS A total of 60 patients were enrolled. 28 lesions were located in the distal and 32 lesions in the proximal parts of the biliary tree. 55 malignant and 5 benign lesions were diagnosed. The sensitivity and accuracy of EUS-FNA and ERCP tissue sampling were 78.2% and 80.0% versus 50.9% and 55.0%, respectively (p = 0.024). The combination of both methods improved the sensitivity and accuracy to 85.5% and 86.7%, respectively. Regarding the location, EUS-FNA is superior to ERCP-brush cytology in diagnosing proximal lesions with sensitivity and specificity of 73.3% and 75.0% vs. 50.0% and 53.1%, respectively (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION EUS-FNA is superior to ERCP brushing in the diagnosis of indeterminate biliary strictures, particularly in distal lesions. Combining ERCP brushing and EUS-FNA improves the diagnosis accuracy.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration Using a 22-G Needle for Hepatic Lesions: Single-Center Experience.

Background/AimsEndoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has been accepted as a reliable tool in diagnosing and staging intra-abdominal tumors. In this study, we aimed to investigate the performance of EUS-FNA in the evaluation of liver masses and its impact on patient management and procedure-related complications retrospectively. MethodsData of patients who underwent EUS-FNA biopsies due to liver masses between November 2017 and July 2018 were retrieved retrospectively. Biopsies were performed using 22-G needles. The demographics, EUS-FNA results, sensitivity and specificity of the procedure, negative predictive value, positive predictive value, and specimen sufficiency rates were assessed. ResultsA total of 25 patients (10 females) were included in the study. The mean age was 62.73±15.2 years. The mean size of the masses was 34.50±16.04 mm. The technical success rate was 88%. During the EUS-FNA procedure, each patient had only one pass with 94.45% of aspirate sufficiency rate and 86.3% of biopsy sufficiency rate. The diagnostic accuracy rate was 86.3%. There were no complications. ConclusionsFor the evaluation of liver masses, EUS-FNA using a 22-G needle with even one pass had high aspiration and biopsy success rates accompanied with high diagnostic accuracy rates.

Effectiveness of Menghini-Type Needles for Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration of Pancreatic Masses.

Cutting needles are thought to be effective as biopsy needles. A few types of cutting needles are available for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), and the Menghini-type needle is an end-type cutting needle. A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare the results of EUS-FNA using a Menghini-type needle (needle M) versus a conventional needle (needle S). The main eligibility criteria were as follows: patients with a pancreatic mass referred for EUS-FNA, ≥ 20years old, and a performance status < 4. The primary outcome was the sample quality. The secondary outcomes were factors associated with the sample quality, diagnostic accuracy, and adverse events. A total of 97 patients were enrolled in this study. The sample quality for total puncture with needle M (92.8%) was significantly higher than that with needle S (81.4%) (p = 0.0305). The tumor size (p = 0.033) and type of needle (p = 0.031) were significant factors associated with adequate tissue collection in univariate and multivariate analyses (odds ratio [OR] 2.71; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12-6.54; p = 0.027 for tumor size, and OR 2.93; 95% CI 1.23-8.21; p = 0.0153 for type of needle). The diagnostic accuracy of each needle was 88.7% (86/97) with needle M and 73.2% (71/97) with needle S. Adverse events occurred in 2 of the 97 patients (0.02%). A Menghini-type needle was able to obtain core tissue for histology more effectively than a conventional aspiration needle. UMIN registration number of 000020668.

Lesion size determines diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA with onsite cytopathologic evaluation for upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions.

The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic yield and factors influencing the diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for upper gastrointestinal (GI) subepithelial lesions (SELs) with rapid onsite cytopathologic evaluation. This is a single-center, retrospective study. Among 22 patients who underwent EUS-FNA, a cytopathological diagnosis was reached in 16 (72.7%) patients. The EUS-FNA results were as follows: seven GISTs (31.8%), six leiomyomas (27.2%), four non-diagnostics (18%), two duplication cysts (9%), two spindle cell tumor (9%), and one ectopic pancreas (4.5%). The long-axis size was > 20 mm in 12 patients (average size: 31.3 ±9.3 mm) and < 20 mm (average size: 16.6 ±2.5 mm) in 10 patients. Diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA from lesions < 20 mm was 50% (5/10 lesions), and of lesions > 20 mm was 91.6% (11/12 lesions) (Fisher's exact test; p=0.028). Six patients underwent surgical resection. Surgical pathology results of five lesions (four GIST, one leiomyoma) were consistent with cytopathology results (83.3%). The diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA of the upper GI SELs with an onsite cytopathologic interpretation was 72.7%. Lesion size < 2 cm significantly reduces the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA for the upper GI SELs.

Predictors of Malignancies in Patients with Inconclusive or Negative Results of Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine-needle Aspiration for Solid Pancreatic Masses.

This study analyzed the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for pancreatic solid masses in patients with or without chronic pancreatitis as well as the clinical parameters relevant to a malignancy when EUS-FNA was negative or inconclusive. A total of 97 patients, who underwent EUS-FNA for solid pancreatic masses over 2 years at a single institution, were evaluated. All patients underwent EUS-FNA for 3-5 passes with 22 or 25 G needles without an on-site cytopathologist. The final diagnosis was obtained by surgery or compatible clinical outcomes for a more than 12 month follow-up. The diagnostic yields in the patients with or without chronic pancreatitis were compared and the histories and laboratory data relevant to pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) or pseudo-tumor were analyzed. The final diagnoses were adenocarcinoma in 88 patients (90.7%) and inflammatory pseudo-tumor in 9 (9.3%). The results of EUS-FNA were adenocarcinoma (74), suspicious (7), atypical (5), negative (10), and inadequate specimen (1). The diagnostic accuracies were 76.9% and 91.6% in patients with or without chronic pancreatitis, respectively. Among the 23 cases with non-diagnostic results of EUS-FNA, PDAC was finally diagnosed in 5 out of 7 suspicious, 3 out of 5 atypical, and 5 out of 10 negative cytology cases. The clinical parameters related to a pseudo-tumor were a history of alcohol consumption and pancreatitis, and normal alkaline phosphatase levels. The diagnostic accuracy of pancreatic masses in the background of chronic pancreatitis was low. When EUS-FNA produced inconclusive results, the histories of alcohol consumption, pancreatitis, and serum levels of alkaline phosphatase are useful for making a final diagnosis.

Efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for schwannoma: six cases of a retrospective study.

Schwannomas are difficult to diagnose using imaging alone. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is an effective and safe tissue sampling technique. Nevertheless, few reports have described EUS-FNA for schwannoma. This study evaluates the efficacy of EUS-FNA for diagnosing schwannoma. This retrospective study examined six consecutive schwannoma patients who were diagnosed as having schwannoma either from EUS-FNA results or from surgically resected specimens. The primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA for schwannoma. The secondary endpoint was EUS-FNA safety. Based on cytomorphologic features and immunocytochemistry results after EUS-FNA, 4 out of 6 patients (66.7%) were diagnosed with schwannoma. The diagnoses before EUS-FNA were the following: 3 cases of gastric subepithelial lesion (SEL, suspicious for gastrointestinal stromal tumor), 1 case of intraperitoneal tumor, 1 case of retroperitoneal tumor, and 1 case of pancreatic tumor, with sizes of 15-44 mm (median 36 mm). No case was diagnosed as schwannoma solely based on image findings. Two cases of gastric SELs could not be diagnosed as schwannoma by EUS-FNA before surgery. Inadequate sampling and a lack of additional material for immunohistochemical studies could have engendered less-definite diagnoses in those cases. No procedural adverse events occurred. The diagnostic accuracy rate of EUS-FNA for schwannoma is somewhat low. However, tissue samples were obtained safely using this method. Moreover, it is an important procedure for diagnosing schwannoma, which cannot be diagnosed solely from image findings.

Impact of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration from peritoneal lesions for avoiding diagnostic laparoscopy (ipad study): The first prospective study (preliminary results)

Background:In patients with undiagnosed peritoneal lesions, diagnostic laparoscopy is often required for tissue diagnosis. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is another possible approach but has never been prospectively evaluated.Objectives:To study the efficacy of EUS-FNA for avoiding diagnostic laparoscopy in patients with peritoneal lesions.Methods:From December 2015 to October 2016, 18 consecutive patients with peritoneal lesions were enrolled. Diagnostic laparoscopy was planned if pathological result of EUS-FNA was negative.Results:Computed tomographic findings were soft tissue nodules/mass deposit in the peritoneum (n = 13; 72.2%), ascites (n = 12; 66.7%), omental cake appearance (n = 6; 33.3%), and stranding of mesentery (n = 3; 16.7%). Two benign cases were pancreatic ascites confirmed by laparoscopy and peritoneal tuberculosis confirmed by successful treatment. EUS-FNA showed positive results of malignancy in 14/18 patients (77.8%) and 28/54 passes (51.8%). Of 28 passes with positive results, 22/28 (78.6%) and 6/28 (21.4%) were obtained from hypoechoic and hyperechoic lesions, respectively. No adverse events were observed. Of four patients with negative results of EUS-FNA, two patients underwent diagnostic laparoscopy showing multiple omental and peritoneal nodules from metastatic stomach cancer (n = 1) and pancreatic ascites (n = 1) and another two patients refused laparoscopy; one had advanced staged pancreatic cancer with poor performance status and another was clinically diagnosed as peritoneal tuberculosis with successful treatment. The sensitivity and specificity of EUS-FNA were 87.5% and 100%, respectively. Diagnostic laparoscopy can be avoided in 14/18 (77.8%) patients.Conclusions:In this prospective study, EUS-FNA has a high sensitivity rate for diagnosing causes of peritoneal lesions and can avoid diagnostic laparoscopy in majority of patients.

Comparison of conventional and ultrasound-guided needle biopsy techniques in the diagnosis of sarcoidosis: a randomized trial.

Endoscopic biopsy techniques are useful in the diagnosis of sarcoidosis. There is a need for randomized trials to establish where these procedures fit in the diagnosis of sarcoidosis. The aim of the study was to compare the diagnostic yield of conventional transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA) with endobronchial ultrasound-guided TBNA (EBUS-TBNA) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in stages I and II of pulmonary sarcoidosis. Patients suspected of sarcoidosis were randomized to undergo TBNA or EBUS-TBNA or EUS-FNA. Patients with negative TBNA and EBUS-TBNA results underwent EUS-FNA and those with negative EUS-FNA results—EBUS-TBNA. If both tests were negative, patients in stage I were scheduled for mediastinoscopy (MS) and those in stage II—for transbronchial lung biopsy (TBLB). In 100 patients, 34 TBNA, 30 EBUS-TBNA, and 36 EUS-FNA procedures were performed at baseline. TBNA was positive in 20 patients (58.8%); EBUS-TBNA, in 23 (76.7%); and EUS-FNA, in 31 patients (86.1%). In patients with negative biopsy results, the second procedure was performed. The results of EUS-FNA were positive in 9 patients and of EBUS-TBNA—in none. Of 17 patients with negative results of both procedures, MS was performed in 6 patients and was positive in 2. In the remaining 11 patients, sarcoidosis was confirmed by TBLB. Sensitivity and accuracy of TBNA compared with EBUS-TBNA and EUS-FNA were 62.5% and 64.7%, 79.3% and 80%, and 88.6% and 88.9%, respectively. Sensitivity and accuracy of EBUS-TBNA were higher (P = 0.139) and of EUS-FNA were significantly higher compared with TBNA (P = 0.012). In stages I and II of pulmonary sarcoidosis, endoscopic ultrasound is a reasonable approach but EUS-FNA seems to be the method of choice.

Improving the results of pancreatic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in daily practice: keep it simple.

Improving the results of pancreatic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in daily practice: keep it simple.

Performance of K-ras mutation analysis plus endoscopic ultrasoundguided fine-needle aspiration for differentiating diagnosis of pancreatic solid mass: a meta-analysis

Difficulties persist in differentiating pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDAC) from pancreatic inflammatory masses (PIM). Auxiliary diagnostic techniques which enhance the endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) diagnostic yield have been attempted, for example, K-ras mutation analysis. We aimed to evaluate the accuracy of K-ras mutation analysis combined with EUS-FNA for the differential diagnosis of PDAC and PIM by pooling data of existing trials. We systematically searched the Medline, PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Central Trials databases for relevant published studies. Meta-analysis was performed. Pooling was conducted in fixed-effect model or random-effect model. In total eight studies, with 696 cases of PDAC and 138 cases of PIM, met our inclusion criteria. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likely ratio and negative likely ratio of K-ras mutation analysis combined with cytopathology for diagnosis of PDAC versus PIM were 90%, 95%, 13.45, and 0.13, respectively. Especially, among total 123 patients whose EUS-FNA results were inconclusive or negative, fifty-nine had K-ras mutations and were finally diagnosed with PDAC (48%, 59/123). Publication bias was not present. Combining K-ras mutation analysis with routine cytology moderately improves the ability of EUS-FNA to differentially diagnose between PDAC and PIM, especially for patients with suspected PDAC yet inconclusive EUS-FNA findings, and may prove to be a valuable supplemental method to EUS-FNA.

PWE-221 Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in suspected sarcoidosis—a 4-year experience from a single centre

IntroductionEUS-FNA allows access to the posterior mediastinum and tissue acquisition under real-time ultrasound guidance through the oesophageal wall. There is ample evidence for effectiveness of EUS-FNA in staging lung cancer...

Optimizing specimen collection and laboratory procedures reduces the non‐diagnostic rate for endoscopic ultrasound‐guided fine‐needle aspiration of solid lesions of the pancreas

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is a routine technique to assess solid pancreatic lesions. The aim of this study was to analyse the effect of optimizing laboratory procedures for specimen preparation on the rate and accuracy of the procedure. All EUS-FNAs of solid pancreatic lesions performed during the year 2000 (Period 1) and from May 2003 to May 2004 (Period 2) were analysed. During Period 1, one experienced gastroenterologist performed all EUS-FNAs, making direct smears and retrieving small fragments if present on the smear for histology. In Period 2, two endoscopists performed the EUS-FNAs and all the material was emptied into a vial containing a fixative. Slide preparation was carried out in the pathology laboratory: one slide was processed using cytocentrifugation and cell blocks were made from left-over material. Neither period utilized rapid on-site evaluation. During the two periods, 67 and 102 FNAs were analysed and showed significantly different (P < 0.001) non-diagnostic rates of 22.8% and 4.2%, respectively. The increased diagnostic yield can be explained by the modified laboratory procedures and to a lesser extent by the increased experience of the gastroenterologists. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy in the second time period were, respectively, 90.6%, 100%, 100%, 81.8% and 93.4%, not significantly different from the first time period. This study shows that accurate EUS-FNA results may be obtained with a low non-diagnostic rate comparable to those reported for rapid on-site evaluation by optimizing laboratory specimen processing in a setting of solid pancreatic lesions.

Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration (EUS‐FNA) of mediastinal lesions

Mediastinal endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is a recognized diagnostic and staging procedure for non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). The aim of this study was to report the experience of mediastinal EUS in an Australian tertiary hospital. A retrospective review was conducted on all patients undergoing mediastinal EUS from February 2002 until August 2007 at St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne. Data were obtained from the EUS databases at St Vincent's Hospital and patient endoscopy reports. The results of EUS-FNA were compared with final diagnosis to calculate sensitivity and specificity. Surgical pathology or long-term follow-up was used to identify false positive or negative results. One hundred forty-eight mediastinal EUS procedure were performed. Males comprised 63.5% and the mean age was 64.3 (range 27-85). Referrals (47%) were from respiratory physicians and 27% were from cardiothoracic surgeons. Indications for EUS-FNA included unexplained mediastinal lymphadenopathy and/or lung lesion for investigation and staging of known NSCLC. Full data were available on 124 (83.8%) cases. Data were analysed from a subset of 112 where FNA was performed. For each indication, EUS-FNA had a high sensitivity and specificity: staging of known NSCLC (sensitivity 92.9%, specificity 88.9%), mediastinal lymphadenopathy (sensitivity 100%, specificity 100%) and lung lesion (sensitivity 94.4%, specificity 85.7%). There were no major complications. This large series of mediastinal EUS shows that it is an important and useful tool for the assessment of mediastinal pathology. It is safe and highly accurate, and should be incorporated into the staging algorithm for NSCLC.

T1431: The Yield of the Cell Block Obtained by Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration for the Diagnosis of Pancreatic Cystic Lesion

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is a well established tool for the evaluation of pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs), and pancreatic mass. The sample adequacy of EUS-FNA for the PCLs without an onsite cytopathologist was reported as about 70%. The aim of this study was to compare EUS-FNA results using the cell block technique with those using cytology without an onsite cytopathologist with regard to diagnostic and sample quality in patients with PCLs.

Contribution of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in the workup of mediastinal lymph nodes

The aim of this retrospective study was to assess endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), a minimally invasive technique, to determine its diagnostic accuracy and morbidity in the etiological diagnoses of mediastinal lymph nodes. A total of 84 patients underwent EUS-FNA biopsy of the mediastinal lymph nodes, and were classified as either malignant disease, inflammatory disease or incidental diagnosis, according to the suspected clinical condition. To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA in each group, a comparison of the cytological results obtained with 19- and 22-gauge needles was performed. All 84 procedures were carried out between January 2004 and June 2008. Six patients were excluded because of non-contributory results. On analyzing the results of EUS-FNA in the malignant group (n=41), the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were 93, 100, 100 and 85%, respectively. In the inflammatory (n=20) and incidental diagnosis (n=17) groups, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were 85, 100, 100 and 75%, and 80, 100, 100 and 77%, respectively. There was no significant difference between the FNA results with the 19-gauge (20/78 patients) versus 22-gauge (58/78 patients) needles (P=0.55). Also, no complications were reported either during the procedure or after the 6-month follow-up. EUS-FNA is a safe and accurate diagnostic procedure for the study of mediastinal lymph nodes not only for malignancy, but also for inflammatory diseases and incidental diagnoses. In addition, there is no difference in diagnostic accuracy whether FNA is carried out with a 19-gauge or 22-gauge needle.

Role of endoscopic ultrasound‐guided fine‐needle aspiration with flow cytometry to diagnose lymphoma: A single center experience

The use of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) +/- flow cytometry (FC) for the diagnosis of suspected lymphoma remains controversial. We report our experience and diagnostic yield for EUS +/- FC for suspected lymphoma. Databases were queried for those who underwent EUS-FNA +/- FC for suspected lymphoma. Hospital charts were reviewed to confirm the final cytological diagnosis, follow up and FC results if obtained. The final diagnosis was confirmed by the results of EUS-FNA +/- FC, other biopsy and/or follow up. In total, 54 patients underwent EUS-FNA of 72 lesions. The final diagnosis of lymphoma was made in 38 of the 54 (70%) patients, and 33 of the 54 (61%) patients relied on EUS-FNA. Cytopathology in 41 patients using EUS-FNA + FC showed lymphoma in 24 patients, atypical lymphoid cells in six and reactive lymph node in 11. In 9 of the 24 with lymphoma by EUS + FC, the diagnosis was confirmed by another diagnostic modality, like surgery, bone marrow biopsy and computed tomography-guided biopsy. Of the six with atypical lymphoid cells, additional diagnostic methods confirmed lymphoma in three. The remaining 13 of the 54 patients underwent EUS-FNA without FC due to insufficient sample (n = 5) or operator choice (n = 8). Cytopathology in these 13 patients without FC showed lymphoma (9), atypical lymphoid cells (3) and reactive node (1). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy of EUS-FNA for lymphoma in all 54 patients ranged from 80% to 87%, 92% to 93%, 97%, 60% to 75% and 83% to 89%, respectively. EUS-FNA is sensitive and specific for the diagnosis of suspected lymphoma. Confirmatory or further testing should be performed when EUS-FNA with or without FC is indeterminate and or non-diagnostic.

Yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of bile duct lesions.

It is still difficult to differentiate reliably between benign and malignant biliary tract lesions. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has added to the diagnostic power of EUS for other gastrointestinal tumors. A retrospective analysis of experience with FNA sampling of bile duct lesions was therefore carried out. All EUS-FNA procedures for bile duct masses or strictures were analyzed at our tertiary referral center from May 2000 through October 2002. Data for EUS findings, the results of EUS-FNA, and tissue sampling at surgery were included. EUS-FNA procedures were carried out using a 22-gauge needle. An experienced cytopathologist was present during FNA in all but three cases. Clinical follow-up details were recorded when available for patients in whom a suitable diagnostic gold standard was not available for comparison. A total of 35 patients underwent EUS-FNA of bile duct lesions during the study period. There were no complications. Data for EUS-FNA of bile duct masses or strictures and tissue obtained at surgery were available for 23 patients. If positive cytology at surgical pathology is taken as the gold standard, EUS-FNA has a diagnostic yield for cancer of 100 % (if atypia/inconclusive findings in the FNA sample are regarded as benign). Eleven patients had a definite malignancy on surgical pathology. Of these 11 patients, five had a finding of malignancy on EUS-FNA, giving a sensitivity of 45 % (if FNA cytology reported as atypia/inconclusive is regarded as benign). Twelve patients had findings of no malignancy from tissue obtained at surgery. Of these 12 patients, nine had benign pathology and three had atypia/inconclusive findings in the EUS-FNA sample (specificity of 100 % if atypia/inconclusive findings are considered benign). A further 12 patients did not have surgical specimens for comparison with EUS-FNA results. Four patients had definite findings of malignancy on EUS-FNA alone, and one patient had FNA findings suspicious for malignancy. Seven patients had negative or equivocal EUS-FNA results. These 12 patients are described but excluded from further analysis, as a gold standard was not available for comparison. However, clinical follow-up data were available for eight of these 12 patients, and in each case the follow-up findings were compatible with previous benign or malignant EUS-FNA findings. The practice of EUS-FNA has improved the diagnostic yield of EUS. These results suggest that it is a safe and useful procedure for investigating biliary masses or strictures that have hitherto caused considerable diagnostic confusion, especially in patients with negative brush cytology findings. The possibility of false-negative findings remains, but core biopsy needles may improve the situation. The results of further studies are awaited.

Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for focal pancreatic lesions in patients with normal parenchyma and chronic pancreatitis

OBJECTIVES: The clinical value of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of pancreatic lesions is uncertain in patients with normal parenchyma and chronic pancreatitis. The aim of this study was to analyze the diagnostic yield and influence of EUS-FNA on the clinical management of patients with pancreatic lesions, in the presence (CP) or absence (NP) of chronic pancreatitis. METHODS: A total of 207 consecutive patients with NP (n = 133) and CP (n = 74) were examined using linear array echo endoscopes for the procedure and 22-gauge needles. RESULTS: Adequate specimens were obtained from 200 lesions. A correct final diagnosis was established at histology (n = 108), bacteriology (n = 9), and clinical follow-up (n = 83). Cytology gave 17 false-negative EUS-FNA results (overall sensitivity: 85%). In patients with NP, 60 solid adenocarcinomas were detected, 32 other malignancies, and 38 benign lesions, with 11 false-negative results (sensitivity: 89%). In patients with CP, only seven of 13 malignancies (all solid adenocarcinomas) were identified using FNA (sensitivity: 54%). Overall, malignancy was identified in 116 patients, 32 of whom (27%) had lesions other than primary solid adenocarcinomas. Management was altered in 25 of these patients, which changed the surgical approach in 21%. EUS-FNA influenced the therapeutic approach in 44% of the total patient group. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-FNA was especially useful in patients with a focal pancreatic lesion with normal parenchyma. Its sensitivity in patients with CP was unacceptably low, and resection of the tumor using standard surgical techniques was still usually required to confirm the correct diagnosis. Diagnostic EUS-FNA influenced clinical management in nearly half of patients.