Histological Diagnostic Accuracy Research Articles

Comparation of 5ml and 10ml Negative Pressures with Wet-suction Techniques for EUS-FNA of Solid Lesions: A Single-center Randomized Controlled Trial.

The negative pressure selectable for the wet-suction technique remains uncertain. The aim was to investigate the quality of sampling and diagnostic accuracy with solid lesions by 5mL and 10mL negative pressure with wet-suction techniques. This is a single-center, crossover, randomized controlled trial conducted with a random sampling technique. In all, 160 patients consecutively undergoing EUS-FNA for solid lesions were randomized in a ratio of 1:1 into 2 groups, the 5mL and 10mL negative pressure wet-suction group. The main outcome was to compare the sample quality between the 2 groups. The secondary outcome was to compare the histologic and cytologic diagnostic accuracy of solid lesions. Pancreatic (n=129) and nonpancreatic (n=27) lesions from 156 lesions were examined. The sample quality concluding cellularity, adequacy, integrity, and blood contamination were comparable between the 2 groups. However, in subgroup analysis, we found 19G FNA provided more integrity of specimen in 5mL than in 10mL group (100% vs. 82.9%, P=0.025). In contrast, this benefit was not noteworthy in the 22G FNA subgroup. And there was no statistically significant in histologic (87.82% vs. 87.18%, P=1.000) and cytologic (78.85% vs. 80.77%, P=0.778) accuracy between 5mL and 10mL groups. When using the wet-suction technique, 5mL and 10mL negative pressure offer equivalent sample quality and diagnostic accuracy. However, the 19G FNA can obtain better sample quality with 5mL negative pressure than 10mL negative pressure.

Dry suction versus wet suction technique of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy for diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: study protocol of a multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiority trial

BackgroundStudies have shown that the wet suction technique in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) generates better histological diagnostic accuracy and specimen quality than the dry suction technique. However, conclusions of wet suction on the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) are still controversial. Besides, the optimal number of passes for EUS-FNB has not been determined. We aimed to design a large multicenter randomized trial to compare the diagnostic accuracy of dry suction versus wet suction technique in solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs) using 22G Franseen needles and determine the optimal number of passes required for EUS-FNB.MethodsThis is a multi-center open-label, randomized controlled non-inferiority trial with two parallel groups. Two hundred patients with SPLs will undergo EUS-FNB using 22G Franseen needles in 4 tertiary hospitals in China and will be randomly assigned to the dry suction group and wet suction group in a ratio of 1:1. The primary endpoint is diagnostic accuracy. Secondary endpoints include the optimal number of needle passes, sensitivity, specificity, specimen quality, cytological diagnoses, time of the procedure, and incidence of complications.DiscussionThis study has been designed to determine (i) whether EUS-FNB using 22G Franseen needle with dry suction is non-inferior to wet suction in terms of diagnostic accuracy and (ii) the optimal number of passes during EUS-FNB of SPLs using 22G Franseen needle.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT05549856. Registered on September 22, 2022.

EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF STEREOTACTIC BIOPSY OF SUPRATENTORIAL TUMORS AT MILITARY HOSPITAL 103

Objectives: To evaluate the histological diagnostic results using stereotactic biopsy of supratentorial tumors at Military Hospital 103. Subjects and methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study on 9 stereotactic biopsies of supratentorial tumors at Military Hospital 103 from 6/2021 - 9/2022. Results: 9 patients in the study included 5 men and 4 women, aged from 29 to 79 years old. The clinical features were dominated by headache (77%), hemiplegia (22.2%), and epilepsy (11.1%). The deep lesions (capsula interna lesions and thalamic lesions) were 44.4%. The histological diagnostic accuracy rate was 88.9%. Histological types include low-grade astrocytoma (44.4%), high-grade astrocytoma (11.1%), oligodendroglioma (11.1%), lymphoma (22.2%), metastatic carcinomas (0%), and brain tissue (11.1%). The mortality rate was 0%. Conclusion: Stereotactic biopsy of supratentorial tumors is a safe procedure that provides a very accurate histological diagnostic result with a low incidence of complications and mortality rate.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy versus Fine-Needle Aspiration in the Diagnosis of Focal Liver Lesions: Prospective Head-to-Head Comparison.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) or fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) from focal liver lesions are indicated in selected cases, but there has been no previous comparison of needle types of the same size. The aim of our study was to compare the histologic diagnostic accuracy and adequacy of cores obtained with EUS-FNB needles in contrast to those obtained with FNA needles in focal liver lesions. This prospective one-center study included patients with left lobe hepatic focal lesions with contraindications for percutaneous liver biopsy or need for EUS for concomitant lesions. Each patient had one pass of 22G EUS-FNB (Franseen) needle and one pass of 22G EUS-FNA in a crossover manner, without macroscopic on-site evaluation. Each sample was analyzed separately for histologic adequacy and diagnosis. The final diagnosis was based on histology results or on imaging follow-up in the case of negative biopsies. The EUS-FNB samples (n = 30) were found to be more adequate for histologic analysis, with more cellularity and longer tissue aggregates than the EUS-FNA samples (n = 30). The accuracy of EUS-FNB was 100%, whereas that of EUS-FNA was 86.7% (p = 0.039). No post-procedure complications were noted. The 22G EUS-FNB needle proved superior to 22G EUS-FNA in terms of tissue acquisition diagnostic accuracy and histologic adequacy in focal liver lesions.

Optical biopsy for esophageal squamous cell neoplasia by using endocytoscopy

BackgroundEndocytoscopy (ECS) enables microscopic observation in vivo for the gastrointestinal mucosa; however, there has been no prospective study in which the diagnostic accuracy of ECS for lesions that have not yet undergone histological diagnosis was evaluated. We conducted a surveillance study for patients in a high-risk group of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) and evaluated the in vivo histological diagnostic accuracy of ECS.MethodsThis study was a multicenter prospective study. We enrolled 197 patients in the study between September 1, 2019 and November 30, 2020. The patients first underwent white light imaging and narrow band imaging, and ultra-high magnifying observation was performed if there was a lesion suspected to be an esophageal tumor. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) was later performed for lesions that were diagnosed to be ESCC by ECS without biopsy. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of ECS for esophageal tumorous lesions.ResultsESD was performed for 37 patients (41 lesions) who were diagnosed as having ESCC by ECS, and all of them were histopathologically diagnosed as having ESCC. The sensitivity [95% confidence interval (CI)] was 97.6% (87.7–99.7%), specificity (95% CI) was 100% (92.7–100%), diagnostic accuracy (95% CI) was 98.9% (94.0–99.8%), positive predictive value (PPV) (95% CI) was 100% (91.4–100%) and negative predictive value (NPV) (95% CI) was 98.0% (89.5–99.7%).ConclusionsECS has a high diagnostic accuracy and there were no false positives in cases diagnosed and resected as ESCC. Optical biopsy by using ECS for esophageal lesions that are suspected to be tumorous is considered to be sufficient in clinical practice.

Usefulness of Macroscopic On-Site Evaluation Using a Stereomicroscope during EUS-FNB for Diagnosing Solid Pancreatic Lesions.

Methods We reviewed a total of 60 consecutive patients who underwent both S-MOSE and rapid on-site cytopathological evaluation (ROSE) during EUS-FNB between July 2019 and October 2020, and the usefulness of S-MOSE in comparison with histology was evaluated. A 22-gauge Franseen needle was used to perform EUS-FNB in all patients, and only the specimens obtained by the first pass were evaluated. The final diagnosis was based on the surgical specimen or the clinical course consistent with the EUS-FNB results. Results The final diagnoses of the 60 patients included 45 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, 6 with autoimmune pancreatitis, 4 with mass-forming pancreatitis, 1 with pancreatic metastasis, 2 with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor, and 2 with intraductal papillary mucinous carcinoma. The histological diagnostic accuracy of the first pass of EUS-FNB was 83.3% (50/60). The agreement between the S-MOSE and the histological diagnosis was 90% (54/60). The positive predictive value of S-MOSE for histological diagnosis was 90.7%, which can be an indicator of when to stop the EUS-FNB procedure. There were no immediate or delayed adverse events reported after the FNB based on the chart and medical visit history review. Conclusion In the EUS-FNB of SPLs, S-MOSE can be an alternative to ROSE for specimen evaluation and has the potential to shorten the procedure time.

Usefulness of the automated multiband imaging system for EUS-FNA biopsy specimen evaluation in patients with upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions.

Sample isolation processing by stereomicroscopy (SIPS) was recently introduced as an alternative to rapid on-site cytologic evaluation and showed high accuracy for use in pathologic diagnoses. SIPS is a useful, but slightly complicated procedure; therefore, a new, more straightforward method for the objective estimation of the core tissue amount required during the sampling is desirable. We evaluated the usefulness of the automated multiband imaging system (AMUS) for calculating whitish core amounts in EUS-FNA biopsy (EUS-FNAB) samples from patients with subepithelial lesions (SELs). Four EUS-FNAB specimens per patient were obtained from 20 patients with upper gastrointestinal SELs. The correlation between the whitish core amount calculated by AMUS, length of the manually measured whitish cores (stereomicroscopically visible white core [SVWC]), and sample suitability for pathologic evaluation were analyzed. We identified 13 patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors, five with leiomyomas, one with a schwannoma, and one with an ectopic pancreas. The histological diagnostic accuracy was 100%, median SVWC length was 9 mm, and median whitish core area, calculated using AMUS, was 10 mm2. SVWC length correlated with whitish core amount (ρ = 0.81, P < 0.01) and adequacy score (ρ = 0.54, P < 0.01). Whitish core amount correlated with adequacy score (ρ = 0.54, P < 0.01). The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve calculated for whitish core amount with respect to the histological diagnosis was 0.83 (P < 0.01; cutoff ≥4 mm2, sensitivity 98.4%). AMUS, a simple on-site verification instrument, is an alternative to SIPS for determining the appropriate SEL tissue sampling quantity with high diagnostic accuracy.

Comparison of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration with 19-Gauge and 22-Gauge Needles for Solid Pancreatic Lesions.

PurposeWe aimed to compare the histological and/or cytological diagnostic outcomes of EUS-FNA using 19G and 22G needles for solid pancreatic lesions and to evaluate the feasibility and safety of 19G needle.Patients and MethodsData from patients with solid pancreatic lesions, who underwent EUS-FNA, were retrospectively retrieved from a single tertiary center from June 2017 to January 2021. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of diagnosis, sample adequacy, number and time of punctures, and adverse events, were compared between the 19G and 22G groups. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify optimal factors for a correct histological diagnosis.ResultsA total of 186 patients (19G group, n = 90; 22G group, n = 96) were analyzed in the study. The higher sensitivity and accuracy were observed in 19G group than those in the 22G group both in histological evaluation (89.3% vs 76%, p = 0.031; 91.1% vs 79.2%, p = 0.023; respectively) and in the combined histological and cytological evaluations (93.3% vs 81.3%, p = 0.027; 94.4% vs 84.3%, p = 0.027, respectively). However, there were no significant differences in specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). The number of needle passes and the puncture time were significantly lower in the 19G group than that in the 22G group (1.66 ± 0.07 vs 2.25 ± 0.08, p < 0.001; 125.4 ± 4.93s vs 169.0 ± 5.6s p < 0.001; respectively). Only 2 cases were failed in the 19G group and no serious complications occurred. Univariate and multivariate logistic analyses suggested that CA199 levels and needle types are related to the accuracy of the EUS-FNA histological diagnosis.ConclusionEUS-FNA using a 19G needle is effective and safe for solid pancreatic lesions. Compared with the 22G needle, EUS-FNA with a 19G needle can obtain a better histological diagnostic accuracy of solid pancreatic lesions, and with fewer needle passes and in a shorter time.

The Application of Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound for Core Needle Biopsy of Subpleural Pulmonary Lesions: Retrospective Analysis in 92 Patients

The purpose of this study was to investigate the role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in determining the viable target area in patients with subpleural pulmonary lesions before ultrasound-guided transthoracic core biopsy. In this retrospective study, we analyzed 92 patients with subpleural pulmonary lesions (63 males and 29 females; mean age: 65.17 ± 11.72 y). All patients underwent B-mode ultrasound, color Doppler and CEUS. Color Doppler was performed to identify the major vessels. The time to enhancement of the contrast agents, homogeneity of enhancement and the presence of areas without enhancement were recorded after administration of the contrast agents. The viable target areas were defined as regions showing enhancement relative to those without enhancement and regions showing delayed enhancement in reference to peripheral lung tissues showing early enhancement. Afterward, real-time ultrasound-guided transthoracic core needle (18 gauge) biopsies were performed and the complication rate, success rate and diagnostic accuracy were calculated. With CEUS, the needle pathways of these lesions were readjusted the biopsy strategy in 40/92 patients (43.5%). It was determined that the satisfactory rate of the subsequent biopsy specimen was 100%. The histologic diagnostic accuracy of the biopsy was 97.83%. No serious complications occurred during the biopsy. In conclusion, the application of CEUS before biopsy was able to depict the viable target areas of the lesion to readjust the biopsy routes. With the help of CEUS, ultrasound-guided core biopsy could obtain adequate samples, improve the diagnostic accuracy and reduce the complication rates of biopsies.

Clinical study on primary screening of oral cancer and precancerous lesions by oral cytology

BackgroundThis study was conducted to compare the histological diagnostic accuracy of conventional oral-based cytology and liquid-based cytology (LBC) methods.MethodsHistological diagnoses of 251 cases were classified as negative (no malignancy lesion, inflammation, or mild/moderate dysplasia) and positive [severe dysplasia/carcinoma in situ (CIS) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC)]. Cytological diagnoses were classified as negative for intraepithelial lesion or malignancy (NILM), oral low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (OLSIL), oral high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (OHSIL), or SCC. Cytological diagnostic results were compared with histology results.ResultsOf NILM cytology cases, the most frequent case was negative [LBC n = 50 (90.9%), conventional n = 22 (95.7%)]. Among OLSIL cytodiagnoses, the most common was negative (LBC n = 34; 75.6%, conventional n = 14; 70.0%). Among OHSIL cytodiagnoses (LBC n = 51, conventional n = 23), SCC was the most frequent (LBC n = 31; 60.8%, conventional n = 7; 30.4%). Negative cases were common (LBC n = 13; 25.5%, conventional n = 14; 60.9%). Among SCC cytodiagnoses SCC was the most common (LBC n = 16; 88.9%, conventional n = 14; 87.5%). Regarding the diagnostic results of cytology, assuming OHSIL and SCC as cytologically positive, the LBC method/conventional method showed a sensitivity of 79.4%/76.7%, specificity of 85.1%/69.2%, false-positive rate of 14.9%/30.7%, and false-negative rate of 20.6%/23.3%.ConclusionsLBC method was superior to conventional cytodiagnosis methods. It was especially superior for OLSIL and OHSIL. Because of the false-positive and false-negative cytodiagnoses, it is necessary to make a comprehensive diagnosis considering the clinical findings.

Author commentary on David Karsenti et al.

David Karsenti et al. 22G Acquire vs. 20G Procore needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy of pancreatic masses: a randomized study comparing histologic sample quantity and diagnostic accuracy

The Feasibility and Histological Diagnostic Accuracy of Novel Menghini Needle (EUS Sonopsy CY™) for Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration Biopsy of Solid Pancreatic Masses: A Prospective Crossover Study Comparing Standard Biopsy Needles.

Background and Objectives Recently, a 21G Menghini-type needle for EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNAB) has been developed. The stylet of the EUS Sonopsy CY™ remains inside the needle during aspiration. Therefore, it is expected to obtain higher-quality histological core specimens without crushing the material or blood contamination. The aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility and diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNAB of solid pancreatic masses with this new biopsy needle. Methods A total of 30 patients with solid pancreatic masses who underwent EUS-FNAB with two different types of needles, EUS Sonopsy™ and ProCore™, were included in a prospective, randomized, controlled, crossover study. All the pancreatic masses were punctured with the two needles and were randomized regarding the order of the needle to be used. The primary outcome was to compare the diagnostic accuracy and the rates of tissue acquisition of the two needles. Results The tissue acquisition rate was not significantly different between the EUS Sonopsy CY™ needle and the ProCore™ needle (78.6% vs. 82.1%, P = 1.00). The histological diagnostic accuracy was also similar between the two needles (73% vs. 80%, P = .63). There was also no difference regarding the accuracy of cytology alone and the combination of both histological and cytological assessments between the EUS Sonopsy CY™ needle and the ProCore™ needle (90% vs. 87%, P = 1.00 and 90% vs. 90%, P = 1.00, respectively). Conclusions EUS Sonopsy CY™ is a reliable device for EUS-FNAB of solid pancreatic masses.

Comparison of the Modified Wet Suction and Dry Suction Techniques in EUS-FNA for Solid Lesions: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomised Controlled Trial

Background: The optimal sampling techniques for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) remain unclear and have not been standardized. The aim of the study was to compare modified wet suction technique (MWST) and dry suction technique (DRST) for sampling the solid lesions in the pancreas, mediastinum, and abdomen. Methods: We performed a randomised controlled trial at four tertiary care centers in China. Consecutive patients with solid lesions referred for EUS-FNA were randomised in a ratio of 1:1 to receive either DRST or MWST as the first pass. For Group A, the pass sequence was DRST - MWST - DRST - MWST versus MWST - DRST - MWST - DRST for Group B. The outcome measures were the diagnostic yield and specimen quality. Findings: Between May 2016 and January 2018, 364 patients were screened for eligibility. 296 patients were recruited, 269 of whom (134 in Group A versus 135 in Group B) completed the trial. We demonstrated that the MWST group had a significantly better overall histological diagnostic accuracy (84·85%) than DRST group (73·19%, P =0·0013) for all solid lesions (n=269). In subgroup analysis, the MWST group reached a 91·59% histological diagnostic accuracy for non-pancreatic lesions (n=108). Furthermore, the MWST provided better specimen adequacy and less blood contamination than DRST. Interpretation: In this prospective study of sampling solid masses, we found that using MWST resulted in significantly better histological diagnostic accuracy and specimen quality than DRST. For many institutions where rapid on-site evaluation is not routinely available, the MWST within 2 passes of FNA reached a definitive histological diagnosis with no requirement of fine needle biopsy. Trial Registration: The study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02789371) and is completed. Funding Statement: National Natural Science Foundation of China. Declaration of Interests: All authors have declared that no competing interests exist. Ethics Approval Statement: The study was approved by the institutional review boards of all participating centers. Patients provided informed consent for participation in the study.

A multicenter randomized trial comparing a 25-gauge EUS fine-needle aspiration device with a 20-gauge EUS fine-needle biopsy device

Several studies have compared EUS-guided FNA with fine-needle biopsy (FNB), but none have proven superiority. We performed a multicenter randomized controlled trial to compare the performance of a commonly used 25-gauge FNA needle with a newly designed 20-gauge FNB needle. Consecutive patients with a solid lesion were randomized in this international multicenter study between a 25-gauge FNA (EchoTip Ultra) or a 20-gauge FNB needle (ProCore). The primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy for malignancy and the Bethesda classification (non-diagnostic, benign, atypical, malignant). Technical success, safety, and sample quality were also assessed. Multivariable and supplementary analyses were performed to adjust for confounders. A total of 608 patients were allocated to FNA (n= 306) or FNB (n= 302); 312 pancreatic lesions (51%), 147 lymph nodes (24%), and 149 other lesions (25%). Technical success rate was 100% for the 25-gauge FNA and 99% for the 20-gauge FNB needle (P= .043), with no differences in adverse events. The 20-gauge FNB needle outperformed 25-gauge FNA in terms of histologic yield (77% vs 44%, P< .001), accuracy for malignancy (87% vs 78%, P= .002) and Bethesda classification (82% vs 72%, P= .002). This was robust when corrected for indication, lesion size, number of passes, and presence of an on-site pathologist (odds ratio, 3.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.55-8.56; P= .004), and did not differ among centers (P= .836). The 20-gauge FNB needle outperformed the 25-gauge FNA needle in terms of histologic yield and diagnostic accuracy. This benefit was irrespective of the indication and was consistent among participating centers, supporting the general applicability of our findings. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02167074.).

A prospective randomized trial of EUS-guided tissue acquisition using a 25-gauge core biopsy needle with and without a stylet.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition has become the most effective method of obtaining specimens from a solid lesion adjacent to the gastrointestinal tract. No data exist regarding the use of a stylet in the core biopsy needle during EUS-guided tissue acquisition. The aims of this study were to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and diagnostic yield of a 25-gauge core biopsy needle without (S-) a stylet and to compare its performance with that of a 25-gauge core biopsy needle with (S+) a stylet in patients with solid lesions adjacent to the gastrointestinal tract. From November 2013 to January 2016, we performed 114 EUS-guided tissue acquisitions for the diagnosis of solid lesions adjacent to the gastrointestinal tract in a randomized controlled trial. Patients were randomly assigned to the S+ group (n = 57) or the S- group (n = 57). EUS-guided tissue acquisition was performed using a 25-gauge core biopsy needle without an on-site cytopathologist. There were no significant differences in technical success (100 vs. 100%, p = 1.000), the mean number of needle passes (7.0 ± 1.6 vs. 6.8 ± 1.5, p = 0.556), needle malfunction (0 vs. 1.8%, p = 1.000), or complications (1.8 vs. 0%, p = 1.000) between the S+ and S- groups. Both groups exhibited comparable outcomes with respect to cytological diagnostic accuracy (93.0 vs. 91.2%, p = 1.000) and histological diagnostic accuracy (86.0 vs. 87.7%, p = 1.000) for malignancy. The procedure time was significantly shorter in the S- group than in the S+ group (32.4 ± 11.7 vs. 39.7 ± 8.6min, p < 0.001). EUS-guided tissue acquisition using a 25-gauge core biopsy needle without a stylet did not decrease the diagnostic yield for malignancy and was associated with a shorter procedure time than that associated with a stylet.

A 19-Gauge Histology Needle Versus a 19-Gauge Standard Needle in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration for Solid Lesions: A Multicenter Randomized Comparison Study (GREATER Study)

The necessity of histological analysis is increasing. A 19-gauge histology needle (PC19) in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has recently been developed and has shown high yields of tissue acquisition and histological diagnosis. To compare the histological diagnostic yield in single-pass EUS-FNA for solid lesions using PC19 and a standard 19-gauge needle (EC19). Consecutive patients with solid lesions were enrolled and underwent one pass with each of PC19 and EC19 for EUS-FNA with the randomized order of the needles. The primary endpoint was the histological diagnostic accuracy. The secondary endpoints were the feasibility, yield of histological core, cytological and overall diagnostic accuracies, and adverse events. Subgroup analysis was performed for the optimal situation with PC19. Of the 115 patients, 110 underwent EUS-FNA and five were excluded. EUS-FNA was performed from the esophagus in four, stomach in 80, or duodenum in 26. The final diagnosis was malignancy in 100 and benign in 10. The feasibility was 98.2 and 97.3% with PC19 and EC19, respectively (p=1.00). The rate of presence of a histological core and the histological, cytological, and overall diagnostic accuracies for PC19 versus EC19 were 84.6 versus 80.9% (p=0.593), 83.6 versus 73.6% (p=0.099), 63.6 versus 56.4% (p=0.335), and 90.0 versus 79.1% (p=0.039), respectively. PC19 was favored in the trans-esophageal/gastric approaches to obtain a histological diagnosis (p=0.013). Adverse events were observed in four patients. Single-pass EUS-FNA with PC19 was feasible and showed significantly higher overall diagnostic accuracy and an increased tendency towards histological diagnostic accuracy, especially with trans-esophageal/gastric FNA.

Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of laparoscopic 3 mm and 5 mm cup biopsies to wedge biopsies of canine livers.

BackgroundDiagnostic accuracy of the 3 mm laparoscopic cup biopsy forceps for collection of tissue samples from canine livers is unproven.Hypotheses/ObjectivesCompare sample surface area and portal triad count between 3 mm and 5 mm laparoscopic cup biopsies and compare the histologic diagnosis obtained by each instrument to a standard necropsy wedge. The hypothesis was that more portal triads and greater sample surface area would be found with the 5 mm samples and the laparoscopic instruments would not have significantly different levels of agreement with necropsy wedge diagnosis.AnimalsTwenty‐one client‐owned dogs undergoing necropsy.MethodsProspective ex vivo study. Three samples (3 mm, 5 mm, and wedge) were taken of 2 different hepatic divisions within 24 hours of death. Morphologic diagnosis, World Small Animal Veterinary Association histologic features, surface area, and portal triad numbers were compared among the 3 samples.ResultsThere were significantly more portal triads (mean 21.4 versus 13.8; P < .0001) and a higher surface area (20.3 mm2 versus 11.5 mm2; P < .0001) in the 5 mm samples compared to 3 mm samples. Kappa coefficients and percent agreement for histologic diagnosis as compared to the wedge biopsy were not significantly different between the 2 instrument sizes (κ = 0.383 and 0.436, respectively; 67% and 69%, respectively).Conclusions and Clinical ImportanceDespite yielding smaller sample sizes, the 3 mm laparoscopic cup biopsy has a similar level of histologic diagnostic accuracy to the 5 mm instrument.

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

Background: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is effective for tissue diagnosis of pancreatic mass. To improve diagnostic yield and drawbacks, 22-gauge (G) core biopsy (FNB) needle has been developed. This study aims to compare 22G FNA and FNB needles for EUS-guided sampling of suspected pancreatic cancer.Methods: This is a randomized controlled crossover trial. A total of 60 patients with suspected unresectable pancreatic cancer referred for EUS-guided sampling were randomly assigned to two groups. Both groups had 22G FNA and FNB needles performed in a randomized order. The primary endpoint was the cytological, histological and overall diagnostic accuracy of pancreatic cancer.Results: FNA and FNB needles reported similar level of diagnostic accuracy (FNA needle 95% vs. FNB needle 93.3%; p = .564), and it was not statistically different. However, cytological cellularity was significantly higher in the FNB needles compared to FNA needles (odds ratio 2.75, 95% confidence interval (CI)). There were no procedure-related complications in both needles.Conclusions: The diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided sampling for pancreatic cancer using 22G FNA is comparable to FNB needles. The cytological quality of specimen is better in the FNB needle.

Clinical Relevance of Prognostic and Predictive Molecular Markers in Gliomas.

Sorting and grading of glial tumors by the WHO classification provide clinicians with guidance as to the predicted course of the disease and choice of treatment. Nonetheless, histologically identical tumors may have very different outcome and response to treatment. Molecular markers that carry both diagnostic and prognostic information add useful tools to traditional classification by redefining tumor subtypes within each WHO category. Therefore, molecular markers have become an integral part of tumor assessment in modern neuro-oncology and biomarker status now guides clinical decisions in some subtypes of gliomas. The routine assessment of IDH status improves histological diagnostic accuracy by differentiating diffuse glioma from reactive gliosis. It carries a favorable prognostic implication for all glial tumors and it is predictive for chemotherapeutic response in anaplastic oligodendrogliomas with codeletion of 1p/19q chromosomes. Glial tumors that contain chromosomal codeletion of 1p/19q are defined as tumors of oligodendroglial lineage and have favorable prognosis. MGMT promoter methylation is a favorable prognostic marker in astrocytic high-grade gliomas and it is predictive for chemotherapeutic response in anaplastic gliomas with wild-type IDH1/2 and in glioblastoma of the elderly. The clinical implication of other molecular markers of gliomas like mutations of EGFR and ATRX genes and BRAF fusion or point mutation is highlighted. The potential of molecular biomarker-based classification to guide future therapeutic approach is discussed and accentuated.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses: 22-gauge aspiration versus 25-gauge biopsy needles

BackgroundBiopsy needles have recently been developed to obtain both cytological and histological specimens during endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). We conducted this study to compare 22-gauge (G) fine needle aspiration (FNA) needles, which have been the most frequently used, and new 25G fine needle biopsy (FNB) needles for EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of all EUS-guided sampling performed between June 2010 and October 2013. During the study period, 76 patients with pancreatic masses underwent EUS-guided sampling with a 22G FNA needle (n = 38) or a 25G FNB needle (n = 38) for diagnosis. An on-site cytopathologist was not present during the procedure. Technical success, the number of needle passes, cytological diagnostic accuracy, cytological sample quality (conventional smear and liquid-based preparation), histological diagnostic accuracy, and complications were reviewed and compared.ResultsThere were no significant differences in technical success (100 % for both), the mean number of needle passes (5.05 vs. 5.55, P = 0.132), or complications (0 % for both) between the 22G FNA group and the 25G FNB group. The 22G FNA and 25G FNB groups exhibited comparable outcomes with respect to cytological diagnostic accuracy (97.4 % vs. 89.5 %, P = 0.358) and histological diagnostic accuracy (34.2 % vs. 52.6 %, P = 0.105). In the cytological sample quality analysis, the 25G FNB group exhibited higher scores for the amount of diagnostic cellular material present (22G FNA: 0.92 vs. 25G FNB: 1.32, P = 0.030) and the retention of appropriate architecture (22G FNA: 0.97 vs. 25G FNB: 1.42, P = 0.010) in the liquid-based preparation. The 25G FNB group showed a better histological diagnostic yield for specific tumor discrimination compared with the 22G FNA group (60 % vs. 32.4 %, P = 0.018).ConclusionsUse of the 25G FNB needle was technically feasible, safe, efficient, and comparable to use of the standard 22G FNA needle in patients with solid pancreatic masses in the absence of an on-site cytopathologist. The cytological sample quality in the liquid-based preparation and the histological diagnostic yield for specific tumor discrimination of EUS-guided sampling using a 25G FNB needle were significantly higher than those using a 22G FNA needle.