Endoscopic Ultrasound Staging Research Articles

Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Staging and Vascular Assessment of Pancreatic Cancer.

Introduction Computed tomography (CT) of the abdomen with contrast stands as the gold standard for assessing pancreatic cancer, encompassing both staging and vascular analysis. However, not all patients are suitable candidates for contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) scans due to factors such as contrast agent allergies, pregnancy, renal impairment, radiation risks, and limited tissue sampling capability in CECT scans of the abdomen. In light of these challenges, this study evaluated the diagnostic capabilities of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) compared to CECT for staging and vascular assessment of pancreatic cancer. Methods Fifty patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer underwent evaluations using both CECT scans and EUS, focusing on staging and vascular invasion assessment. Vascular evaluation was carried out using a categorization system based on EUS findings, classifying them into three types based on the tumor-vessel relationship: Type 1 indicating clear invasion or encasement of a vessel by a tumoror contact with a vessel wall exceeding 180 degrees, Type 2 representing abutment, wherein a tumor contacts a vessel wall but at an angle less than 180 degrees, and Type 3 implying clear non-invasion, where a discernible distance exists between a tumor and a vessel. In this categorization, Type 1 and Type 2 indicated signs of vascular invasion, while Type 3 indicated vascular non-invasion. These findings were subsequently compared to the results from CECT scans. The endoscopist performing EUS was blinded to the CT outcomes prior to the examination. Results Regarding pancreatic cancer staging, EUS exhibited remarkable sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy rates of 100% according to the T criterion.As for vascular invasion assessment,EUS demonstrated sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of 100%, 95.93%, and 96%, respectively, for venous invasion. For arterial invasion, the figures were 95.65% sensitivity, 100% specificity, and an overall accuracy of 99.5%. Conclusion EUS is an effective modality for evaluating both staging and vascular invasion in pancreatic cancer, boasting exceptional sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy rates. The findings are robust enough to consider EUS a viable alternative to CT scans in evaluation, with the added advantage of EUS offering tissue sampling capability.

Artificial Intelligence Model for a Distinction between Early-Stage Gastric Cancer Invasive Depth T1a and T1b.

Background: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a widely accepted treatment for patients with mucosa (T1a) disease without lymph node metastasis. However, the inconsistency of inspection quality of tumor staging under the standard tool combining endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) with computed tomography (CT) scanning makes it restrictive. Methods: We conducted a study using data augmentation and artificial intelligence (AI) to address the early gastric cancer (EGC) staging problem. The proposed AI model simplifies early cancer treatment by eliminating the need for ultrasound or other staging methods. We developed an AI model utilizing data augmentation and the You-Only-Look-Once (YOLO) approach. We collected a white-light image dataset of 351 stage T1a and 542 T1b images to build, test, and validate the model. An external white-light images dataset that consists of 47 T1a and 9 T1b images was then collected to validate our AI model. The result of the external dataset validation indicated that our model also applies to other peer health institutes. Results: The results of k-fold cross-validation using the original dataset demonstrated that the proposed model had a sensitivity of 85.08% and an average specificity of 87.17%. Additionally, the k-fold cross-validation model had an average accuracy rate of 86.18%; the external data set demonstrated similar validation results with a sensitivity of 82.98%, a specificity of 77.78%, and an overall accuracy of 82.14%. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the AI model can effectively replace EUS and CT in early GC staging, with an average validation accuracy rate of 86.18% for the original dataset from Linkou Cheng Gun Memorial Hospital and 82.14% for the external validation dataset from Kaohsiung Cheng Gun Memorial Hospital. Moreover, our AI model's accuracy rate outperformed the average EUS and CT rates in previous literature (around 70%).

Preoperative EUS vs. PET-CT Evaluation of Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy for Esophagogastric Cancer and Its Correlation with Survival.

The objective of our study was to investigate whether Endoscopic Ultrasonography (EUS) and Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography (PET-CT) restaging can predict survival in upper gastrointestinal tract adenocarcinomas and to assess their accuracy when compared to pathology. We conducted a retrospective study on all patients who underwent EUS for staging of gastric or esophago-gastric junction adenocarcinoma between 2010 and 2021. EUS and PET-CT were performed, and preoperative TNM restaging was conducted using both procedures within 21 days prior to surgery. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. A total of 185 patients (74.7% male) were included in the study. The accuracy of EUS for distinguishing between T1-T2 and T3-T4 tumors after neoadjuvant therapy was 66.7% (95% CI: 50.3-77.8%), and for N staging, the accuracy was 70.8% (95% CI: 51.8-81.8%). Regarding PET-CT, the accuracy for N positivity was 60.4% (95% CI: 46.3-73%). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a significant correlation between positive lymph nodes on restaging EUS and PET-CT with DFS. Multivariate COX regression analysis identified N restaging with EUS and PET-CT, as well as the Charlson comorbidity index, as correlated factors with DFS. Positive lymph nodes on EUS and PET-CT were predictors of OS. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, the independent risk factors for OS were found to be the Charlson comorbidity index, T response by EUS, and male sex. Both EUS and PET-CT are valuable tools for determining the preoperative stage of esophago-gastric cancer. Both techniques can predict survival, with preoperative N staging and response to neoadjuvant therapy assessed by EUS being the main predictors.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Endoscopic Ultrasonography in Selecting Patients for Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Early Gastrointestinal Neoplasms.

Tumor invasion depth and lymph node metastasis determine the prognosis of gastrointestinal (GI) neoplasms. GI neoplasms limited to mucosa (m1 or m2) and superficial submucosa (sm1) can be treated effectively with minimally invasive endoscopic therapy, while the deep invasion of the submucosa (sm2 or sm3) is associated with lymph node metastasis, and surgical resection is required. Correct staging is therefore crucial for preoperative evaluation and planning. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) can be used to detect the depth of invasion due to its close proximity to the lesion. The diagnostic accuracy of EUS, when compared to conventional endoscopic staging, is debated as it can under- or overstage the lesion. We aim in this study to determine if EUS can accurately differentiate mucosal from submucosal GI neoplasms to select patients with early GI lesions for endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) or surgery. From March 2014 to February 2022, 293 patients with early superficial GI neoplasms were admitted to our endoscopic unit for EUS staging. To evaluate the accuracy of EUS, we compared the preoperative EUS findings with the definitive histopathologic findings on the resected specimen. Overall, 242 of 293 lesions were correctly staged by EUS (82.59%). In the evaluation of submucosal invasion or deeper, EUS understaged 38 of 293 (12.96%) and overstaged 13 of 293 (4.43%) lesions. EUS has excellent accuracy in staging superficial GI neoplasms; its use is highly recommended before ESD since it can also detect lymph node metastases around the lesions, thus changing the indication from ESD to surgery.

Endoscopic Ultrasound Predicts Risk of Occult Intra-Abdominal Metastases in Localized Gastric Cancer: A Validation Study.

In gastric cancer (GC) patients without imaging evidence of distant metastasis, diagnostic staging laparoscopy (DSL) is recommended to detect radiographically occult peritoneal metastasis (M1). DSL carries a risk for morbidity and its cost-effectiveness is unclear. Use of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) to improve patient selection for DSL has been proposed but not validated. We aimed to validate an EUS-based risk classification system predicting risk for M1 disease. We retrospectively identified all GC patients without positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) evidence of distant metastasis who underwent staging EUS followed by DSL between 2010 and 2020. T1-2, N0 disease was EUS "low-risk"; T3-4 and/or N+ disease was "high-risk". A total of 68 patients met inclusion criteria. DSL identified radiographically occult M1 disease in 17 patients (25%). Most patients had EUS T3 tumors (n = 59, 87%) and 48 (71%) patients were node-positive (N+). Five (7%) patients were classified EUS "low-risk" and 63 (93%) were classified "high-risk". Of 63 "high-risk" patients, 17 (27%) had M1 disease. The ability of "low-risk" EUS to predict M0 disease at laparoscopy was 100% and DSL would have been avoided in five patients (7%). This stratification algorithm showed a sensitivity of 100% (95% confidence interval (CI): 80.5-100%) and a specificity of 9.8% (95% CI: 3.3-21.4%). Use of an EUS-based risk classification system in GC patients without imaging evidence of metastasis helps identify a subset of patients at low-risk for laparoscopic M1 disease who may avoid DSL and proceed directly to neoadjuvant chemotherapy or resection with curative intent. Larger, prospective studies are needed to validate these findings.

OGC P47 The Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound Scan In Staging Patients With Oesophageal Cancer- A Retrospective Single Centre Study

Abstract Background There are conflicting opinions on the role of Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) in the staging of oesophageal cancer (OG) patients which can complicate and delay intervention. We aim to audit the use of EUS in the OG cancer staging pathway as well as assess accuracy in selected cases. Methods A retrospective audit of the hospital database of patients diagnosed with oesophageal carcinoma between January 2016 and March 2021.The duration between the first MDT and EUS performed was calculated. Concordance between initial CT and EUS stage as well as histology in patients that were offered direct to surgery were evaluated using Cohen's Weighted Kappa. Results A total of 301 patients were identified. Overall, there was a moderate agreement (K=0.526) between CT and EUS reported T Staging(p<0.001). There was substantial agreement (K=0.798) between CT reporting T2, T3 and EUS(p<0.0005). Twenty-seven patients underwent upfront surgery-11 were T1, 16 were T2 and T3 disease. Comparing to final histology, EUS reported an accurate T1 stage in 36.3% compared with 0% with CT (p=0.018), whereas T2 and T3 disease were accurately reported with EUS and CT in 43.7% and 37.5% respectively (p=0.375). The median number of days between first MDT and EUS was 14 days (8,18) and this was requested after CT and PET CT results were available in 80% of cases. Conclusions This audit demonstrates minor differences between EUS and CT for T2 and T3 disease and therefore unlikely to alter management. However, EUS is superior to CT for staging Tx and T1 disease and is therefore likely to impact on the treatment options. EUS also contributed to prolonged pre-treatment staging time. Adopting a selective approach to EUS could result in overall reduction of waiting times from referral to decision making and increase cost-effectiveness.

Systematic endoscopic staging of mediastinum to determine impact on radiotherapy for locally advanced lung cancer (SEISMIC): protocol for a prospective single arm multicentre interventional study

BackgroundEndobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) is established as the preferred method of mediastinal lymph node (LN) staging in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Selective (targeted) LN sampling is most commonly performed however studies in early stage NSCLC and locally advanced NSCLC confirm systematic EBUS-TBNA evaluation improves accuracy of mediastinal staging. This study aims to establish the rate of detection of positron emission tomography (PET)-occult LN metastases following systematic LN staging by EBUS-TBNA, and to determine the utility of systematic mediastinal staging for accurate delineation of radiation treatment fields in patients with locally advanced NSCLC.MethodsConsecutive patients undergoing EBUS-TBNA for diagnosis/staging of locally advanced NSCLC will be enrolled in this international multi-centre single arm study. Systematic mediastinal LN evaluation will be performed, with all LN exceeding 6 mm to be sampled by TBNA. Where feasible, endoscopic ultrasound staging (EUS-B) may also be performed. Results of minimally invasive staging will be compared to FDG-PET. The primary end-point is proportion of patients in whom systematic LN staging identified PET-occult NSCLC metastases. Secondary outcome measures include (i) rate of nodal upstaging, (ii) false positive rate of PET for mediastinal LN assessment, (iii) analysis of clinicoradiologic risk factors for presence of PET-occult LN metastases, (iv) impact of systematic LN staging in patients with discrepant findings on PET and EBUS-TBNA on target coverage and dose to organs at risk (OAR) in patients undergoing radiotherapy.DiscussionWith specificity of PET of 90%, guidelines recommend tissue confirmation of positive mediastinal LN to ensure potentially early stage patients are not erroneously denied potentially curative resection. However, while confirmation of pathologic LN is routinely sought, the exact extent of mediastinal LN involvement in NSCLC in patient with Stage III NSCLC is rarely established. Studies examining systematic LN staging in early stage NSCLC report a significant discordance between PET and EBUS-TBNA. In patients with locally advanced disease this has significant implications for radiation field planning, with risk of geographic miss in the event of PET-occult mediastinal LN metastases. The SEISMIC study will examine both diagnostic outcomes following systematic LN staging with EBUS-TBNA, and impact on radiation treatment planning.Trial registrationACTRN12617000333314, ANZCTR, Registered on 3 March 2017.

TU1.10 Oesophageal/ Oesophagogastric Junction Cancer: EUS Role Revisited

Abstract Introduction Oesophageal and Oesophago-gastric junctional (OGJ) cancer remains a challenge both from the perspective of early diagnosis, prompt staging and subsequent treatment. The prognosis of these cancers is directly related to the stage of the disease at diagnosis. CT scan followed by Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) are investigations which help with the T and N staging. In conjunction with staging tools like PET and laparoscopy there is a resultant delay with frequent breaching of treatment targets. Reducing the number of investigations potentially avoids delays in the management pathway. Methods We conducted a retrospective audit on patients who have had oesophageal cancer resections from 2017 to 2021. We compared the accuracy of the CT scan in comparison to EUS staging preoperatively with final histopathological staging. Patients who had neo-adjuvant therapy were excluded from the final histological comparisons. Results CT is routinely performed in all patients with oesophageal cancer. All oesophageal cancers going for treatment had EUS staging. EUS staging was found most useful for Tx and T1 stages. We did not find EUS additionally useful for T2 and T3 stages. EUS is useful for T4 stages to help exclude inoperability. Conclusion Modern multi-slice CT scans provide a comparable accuracy to EUS for T2 and T3. This suggests that EUS staging can be avoided for CT stage T2 and T3 cancers of the oesophagus and GOJ. This is in keeping with current NICE guidance. EUS has a role in TX, T1 and T4 cancers and can be selectively used as per other specific indications.

Impact of prior biliary stenting on diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasound for mesenteric vascular staging in patients with head of pancreas and periampullary malignancy

ObjectiveThe diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for stratification of head of pancreas and periampullary tumours into resectable, borderline resectable and locally advanced tumours is unclear as is the effect...

Diagnostic Efficacy and Decision-Making Role of Preoperative Endoscopic Ultrasonography in Early Gastric Cancer.

Objectives: Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is the most commonly used method for T staging of early gastric cancer (EGC). However, the studies pertaining to EUS for staging EGC reported widely varied sensitivities and specificities. This study aimed to estimate the overall diagnostic accuracy of EUS for staging the depth of EGCs and to explore the influential factors.Methods: We retrospectively reviewed data from 208 consecutive patients with EGC, and all patients underwent EUS for estimating tumor invasion depth, followed by either curative surgery or endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). The diagnostic accuracy of EUS was evaluated by comparing the final histologic results of resected specimens. The correlation between accuracy of EUS and characteristics of EGC lesion was analyzed.Results: A total of 211 EGC lesions in 208 patients were included. The overall diagnostic accuracy of EUS in assessing the tumor invasion depth of EGC was 55.9%. Multivariate analysis showed that submucosal invasion (OR 2.615; 95% CI 1.203–5.684, P = 0.015) was independently associated with misdiagnosis of the depth of EGC and 0-III type lesions (OR 31.495; 95% CI 2.083–476.256, P = 0.013) were an independent risk factor for over-diagnosis of invasion depth by EUS. However, EUS was only suitable for lesions within absolute indications for endoscopic resection.Conclusions: The overall accuracy of EUS in diagnosing invasion depth of EGC was relatively low. Thus, EUS is not necessary routinely for determining the therapeutic strategy for EGC.

The Value of a Systematic Protocol Using Endobronchial Ultrasound and Endoscopic Ultrasound in Staging of Lung Cancer for Patients with Imaging iN0–N1 Disease

Introduction: We hypothesize that systematic, combined, and multidisciplinary study of the mediastinum (endobronchial ultrasound [EBUS] and endoscopic ultrasound [EUS]) in patients with NSCLC with radiologically normal mediastinum improves the results of mediastinal staging obtained with EBUS alone. Material and Methods: A retrospective study of the prospective database collected on the patients with NSCLC with a radiologically normal mediastinum and an indication for systematic staging with EBUS and EUS. EBUS staging was followed by EUS in patients in which the results from the pathological analysis of EBUS were negative. Results: Forty-five patients were included in the analysis. The combination of EBUS followed by EUS provided better results than EBUS alone: sensitivity (S) 95% versus 80%, negative predictive value (NPV) 96.15% versus 86.21%, negative likelihood ratio 0.05 versus 0.20, and post-test probability 3.8% versus 13.8%. This represents an increase in S (15%), the validity index (6.6%), and NPV (9.9%) compared to EBUS alone. There were 4 false negatives (FNs) (8.8%) with the EBUS test alone. After adding EUS, 3 more cases were positive (6.6%) and only 1 FN (2.2%). Conclusions: In patients with NSCLC and a radiographically normal mediastinum, a systematic and combined staging with EBUS and EUS show higher sensitivity in the detection of mediastinal metastasis than with the use of EBUS alone. The high accuracy of the test means that the use of mediastinoscopy is not necessary to confirm the results in these patients. Since the availability of EUS is low, it may be advisable for the interventional pulmonologist to receive training in EUS-b.

Examination of Endoscopic Ultrasonographic Diagnosis for the Depth of Early Gastric Cancer

BackgroundEndoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is one of the helpful tools to diagnose depth of early gastric cancer (EGC). In this study, we examined efficiencies of EUS for EGC such as overall accuracy, risk factors of over/under-staging, and accuracies of each invasive distance.MethodsA total of 403 EGC lesions that could be investigated by EUS during pre-operation and histological diagnosis after endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) or surgery were enrolled in this study. For the 403 cases, we analyzed the accuracies of depth by conventional endoscopy (CE) and EUS retrospectively. We evaluated the clinical survey items of CE and EUS which will be described later to compare the differences between “accuracy group” and “over-staging group”, and between “accuracy group” and “under-staging group”, retrospectively. Additionally, 78 EGC lesions which were confined to the submucosa and for which it was possible to measure accurate invasive distance from the muscularis mucosae were examined for the relationship between preoperative diagnosis of depth by CE and EUS and invasive distance retrospectively.ResultsThe overall accuracies of both CE and EUS in predicting EGC invasion depth were 87.3%. For CE staging, histological classification was the factor which influenced over-staging. Gastric regions and tumor area were the factors which influenced under-staging of CE. For EUS staging, tumor area was the factor which influenced over-staging, and gastric regions were the factors which influenced under-staging. Both CE and EUS were not sufficient for predicting the lesions confined to < 500 µm from the muscularis mucosae because the accuracies of both in predicting depth were less than 50%. However, EUS has a higher accuracy than CE for the lesions confined to 500 - 2,000 µm.ConclusionsThe overall accuracies of both CE and EUS in predicting EGC invasion depth were equal, but the contributing factors for over/under-staging were different. Both CE and EUS are not sufficient at present to predict the lesions confined to < 500 µm from the muscularis mucosae. However, the accuracy of EUS in predicting them may increase if high-performance EUS systems are developed in the future.

A national cross-sectional survey investigating the use of endoscopic ultrasound in the diagnosis and treatment of oesophageal cancer in the UK

To evaluate variation in the pre-pandemic use of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for oesophageal cancer diagnosis and treatment planning up to 2019, and which factors contributed to this. A UK-wide online survey of oesophagogastric multidisciplinary team lead clinicians was undertaken to determine perceptions towards, and the use of, EUS to aid staging and treatment planning in oesophageal cancer. Thirty-five responses were received, representing 97 UK National Health Service Trusts/Health Boards. A majority of centres (n=21, 60%) did not have formal written guidance for EUS use. Although all respondents had access to EUS, a perceived lack of utility (n=7) and concerns about delaying treatment start dates (n=8) each restricted EUS use for a fifth of respondents. For most centres (n=24, 68.6%), EUS use is case-specific, whereas for 10 (28.6%) EUS is used for all patients with potentially curable disease. A majority of centres use diagnostic positron-emission tomography for radiotherapy target volume delineation (TVD), whereas 22 (62.9%) use EUS. The factors contributing to decisions to use EUS for staging, TVD and surgical planning varied between centres. The proportion of centre respondents who would request EUS in each of six clinical scenarios varied considerably. There were substantial differences in the patient and disease characteristics that are perceived to be indications for EUS use for both staging and treatment planning. Research to clarify in which patients with oesophageal cancer EUS affords benefit is required, as is urgent standardisation of its role in the diagnostic pathway.

Endoscopic ultrasound for staging of esophageal and gastric cancers

Background: Gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) and esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) are one of the leading causes of mortality from gastrointestinal cancer worldwide. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has proved to be a valuable tool for preoperative staging of GAC and EAC in selected cases. Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of EUS for staging of EAC and GAC and selecting patients who are candidates for neoadjuvant therapy, as compared with the previous stage before the implementation of EUS, in a surgical center in Argentina. Material and methods: Consecutive patients with EAC and GAC between 2013-2019 were included. Patients with criteria of unresectable cancer or who underwent emergency surgery were excluded. The sample was divided into four groups G1 and G2 (EAC with and without EUS, respectively) and G3 and G4 (GAC with and without EUS, respectively). The clinical and anatomopathological variables and survival were evaluated in all the groups. Results: A total of 89 patients were included, 40 with EAC (30 in G1 and 10 in G2, and 49 with GAC, 20 in G3 and 29 in G4. Of the patients undergoing EUS staging in G1, 23 (75%) received neoadjuvant therapy vs. 2 patients in G2 (20%) (P ≤ 0.005). Eight patients (40%) in G3 and 2 (7%) in G4 received perioperative chemotherapy (P ≤ 0.005). Lymph node metastases were observed in 9 (30%) of surgical specimens of EAC in G1 and in 60% in G2 (P ≤ 0.005), and in 45% in G3 and G4. After a mean follow-up of 36 months (6-72), we observed a non-significant trend toward higher overall survival and disease-free survival in patients undergoing EUS staging. Conclusion: EUS for preoperative staging pf EAC and GAC is a useful tool. Although the use of EUS use may be a challenging task in many centers in Argentina, future efforts are needed to include this test in selected cases for staging patients with these types of cancers

Staging esophageal cancer: low EUS accuracy in t2n0 patients.

Background and study aims Esophageal cancer (EC) is one of the most lethal malignancies worldwide. Staging of EC is performed with computed tomography (CT), positron-emission tomography (PET), and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS). Patient management mostly depends on lymph node status. Compared to histopathology, the accuracy of EUS for T and N parameters is about 85 % and 75 %, respectively. Errors in staging may change prognosis. The aim of this study was to assess the role of EUS in T2-N0 EC considering the experience of two high-volume digestive endoscopic centers. Methods Two prospectively collected databases were queried to identify all patients with EC, staged as cT2N0 by EUS, with no distant metastases at CT/PET scan and who underwent transthoracic esophagectomy. Preoperative EUS staging (cTNM) was compared to histopathology of the surgical specimen (pTNM) to evaluate accuracy. Results Of 729 consecutive patients with EC between January 2011 and September 2018, 72 (49 men) had cT2N0 disease. CT and PET scans confirmed the absence of distant metastasis. In 43 of 72 patients (60 %), the evaluation was correct, 23 of 72 (31,7 %) were understaged, and six of 72 patients (8,3 %) were overstaged. Among the understaged patients, eight were understaged by tumor depth (35 %), seven by nodal involvement (30 %), and eight by both (35 %). All six patients who were overstaged had T1b-N0 disease. EUS accuracy was 77 % in staging for tumor depth and 82 % in staging for nodal metastases. The positive predictive value (PPV) for cT2N0 EC was 60 % (43 pT2N0 /72 cT2N). Conclusions The accuracy of EUS staging of T2N0 EC is low, with only 60 % of patients undergoing appropriate therapy based on histopathology.

Endoscopic Ultrasound Quality Metrics in Clinical Practice.

Recent advances in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), particularly EUS-guided tissue acquisition, may have affected EUS procedural performance as measured by current American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE)/American College of Gastroenterology (ACG) quality indicators. Our study aims to assess how these quality metrics are met in clinical practice. We retrospectively analyzed 732 EUS procedures; data collected were procedural indications, technical aspects and outcomes, completeness of documentation, and malignancy staging. EUS was performed in 660 patients for a variety of indications. All ASGE/ACG EUS procedural quality metrics were met or exceeded. Intervention was successful in 97.7% (715/732) of cases, with complication rate of 0.4% (3/732). EUS outcomes changed clinical management in 58.7% of all cases and in 91.2% of malignancy work-up cases; in 26.0% of suspected choledocholithiasis cases, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was avoided after EUS. Locoregional EUS staging was accurate in 61/65 (93.8%) cases of non-metastatic disease and in 15/22 (68.2%) cases of metastatic disease. Pancreatic mass malignancy detection rate with EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) or fine needle biopsy (FNB) was 75.8%, with a sensitivity of 96.2%; a significant increase in detection rate from 46.2% (6/13) to 95.0% (19/20) (p = 0.0026) was observed with a transition to the predominant use of FNB for tissue acquisition. All ASGE/ACG EUS quality metrics were met or exceeded for EUS procedures performed for a wide variety of indications in a diverse patient population. EUS was instrumental in changing clinical management, with a low complication rate. The malignancy detection rate in pancreatic masses significantly increased with FNB use.

Diagnosis and follow-up value of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in primary gastric non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

BackgroundThe lesion of primary gastric non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (PGL) originates from the submucosa, so conventional gastroscopy has limited diagnostic potential. This study evaluated the diagnosis and follow-up value of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in PGL.MethodsSeventy-nine patients diagnosed with PGL either by EUS and biopsy pathology or by postoperative pathology were included in the study. All subjects underwent EUS with deep targeted biopsy and regular follow-up.ResultsWe found sensitivity and specificity of EUS combined with deep targeted biopsy for PGL as 87.3% (69/79) and 80.0% (20/25) respectively, and the diagnostic accuracy as 85.6% (89/104). EUS combined with deep targeted biopsy had significantly greater diagnostic accuracy than gastroscopy [85.6% (89/104) vs. 57.7% (60/104); (P<0.001)]. The diagnostic accuracy of T tumor staging and N tumor staging of EUS were 13/13 and 11/13 respectively compared with postoperative staging. The mean time of complete remission of lymphoma after eradication treatment in the H. pylori-negative (successful eradication) group (3.2±0.7 months) was shorter than that in H. pylori-positive patients (failed eradication) group (4.5±0.8 months), there was statistically significant difference between the two groups (t=4.3, P<0.001).ConclusionsThis study demonstrated that EUS combined with deep targeted biopsy was associated with increased detection of Primary gastric non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (PGL), in terms of depth and extent of the lesion to guide treatment selection and to evaluate treatment efficacy.

Value of staging information provided by linear-array endoscopic ultrasound for therapeutic response and prognosis prediction in gastric lymphoma.

Currently, positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT)-based Ann Arbor and Lugano staging systems are widely applied for gastric lymphoma, which majorly focused on the extent of systemic invasion, but there is insufficient assessment in extent of gastric wall invasion. Thus, we aimed to assess the value of linear-array EUS in therapeutic response and prognosis prediction, and provide an endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-based staging system for gastric lymphoma. Between January 2012 and October 2019, 191 patients with histologically confirmed gastric lymphoma were included. We analyzed patients' clinicopathologic data, white-light appearance, EUS staging, tumor extension, and therapeutic regime to identify the predictors for complete remission (CR) and progression-free survival (PFS). With a median follow-up period of 547days, 136 patients achieved CR. Multivariate regression analysis identified EUS T stage three CR predictors, including T stage (T2-T4 vs. T1, OR=0.271, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.108-0.683, P=0.0085) was the independent predictor. The Ki67 index, lesion surface, EUS stage, tumor extension, and regime predicted PFS, but tumor extension was the only independent predictor (local vs. system, OR=6.005, 95%CI=2.365-15.236, P<0.001). The concordance index (C-index) was higher for CR rate in the EUS-based staging [0.673; 95% CI=0.628-0.718] than Lugano staging [0.663; 95% CI 0.616-0.710], and for PFS in the EUS-based staging [0.694; 95% CI 0.586-0.802] than Lugano staging [0.684; 95% CI 0.564-0.804]. An EUS-based staging system is suitable for CR and PFS prediction in gastric lymphoma, with highly informative assessment in extent of gastric wall invasion.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Random Omental Fine Needle Aspiration: A Novel Technique for the Diagnosis of Peritoneal Carcinomatosis.

Background/AimsDiagnostic abdominal paracentesis has been described in literature to have variable sensitivity of 50%–75% for the detection of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC). We believe that random needle aspirates from the omentum, even in the absence of obvious deposits by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), could prove malignancy in patients with PC. MethodsConsecutive patients who underwent EUS for diagnosis and staging of cancer and found to have ascites were included after obtaining informed consent. EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) from random sites in the omentum was performed through the transgastric route using a linear echoendoscope. ResultsFifty-four patients underwent EUS during October 2015 to April 2017 for detection, staging, or FNA of a suspected malignant lesion. Ascites was seen in 17 patients and 15 patients who fulfilled the criteria were included. The procedure was successful in all patients. Cytology was suggestive of malignancy in 12 (80%) but not suggestive of malignancy in 3 (20%) patients. Three patients who tested negative had hyperbilirubinemia with biliary obstruction. Their ascitic fluid analysis result was also negative. ConclusionsRandom FNA of the omentum in patients with malignancy-related ascites is highly effective in the diagnosis of PC and could be employed during EUS evaluation of malignancies.

Balloon Dilation for Endosonographic Staging in Esophageal Cancer: A Phase 1 Clinical Trial

Dilation in patients with malignant esophageal strictures precluding the passage of the endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) scope allows complete evaluation; however, it may be associated with complications. This study evaluates the safety and clinical value of balloon dilation to complete EUS in patients with stenotic esophageal cancers. This study consists of a phase I clinical trial. One-hundred-and fifty patients were recruited. Endoscopic balloon dilation was performed before EUS in patients with high-grade stenosis. The analysis was focused on the ability to complete an endosonographic examination after dilation, 30-day morbidity, and change in the final stage or definitive management based on the completed endosonographic examination. Dilation was required in 55 patients (36.7%), with a complication rate of 10.9% (n= 6). Dilation allowed completion of EUS in 53 patients (96.4%), leading to a modification of the clinical stage for 18 patients (34%) and a deviation in the treatment plan in 7 patients (13.2%). No differences were found in these variables when compared with the group that did not require dilation (26.3% and 14.7%, P= .33 and P= .79, respectively). Dilation was associated with more advanced disease on final pathology among patients who underwent surgical resection (P= .006). High-grade malignant esophageal strictures that preclude the passage of the ultrasound probe are associated with advanced stage disease. Owing to the high risk of perforation and the limited benefit in staging, balloon dilation to complete the EUS staging should be avoided. (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01950442.).