Utility Of Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine-needle Aspiration Research Articles

Diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound with fine-needle aspiration in pancreatic cystic lesions

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

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

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

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration in the Diagnosis of Adrenal Metastasis in a High-Risk Population

While the left adrenal gland is readily accessible via endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), data regarding the utility of EUS-FNA in the diagnosis of adrenal lesions remain limited. We aimed to ( 1) describe the clinical context, adverse event rate, and diagnostic performance of EUS-FNA, and ( 2) compare the safety profile and diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA with percutaneous adrenal biopsy. Single-center, retrospective cohort study. Medical records of patients who underwent adrenal EUS-FNA from 2005-2016 were reviewed. Biopsy outcomes were evaluated using a predefined reference standard. Results were compared to patients who underwent percutaneous biopsy (n = 419; 1994-2014) at the same institution. A total of 121 patients underwent EUS-FNA of 122 adrenal lesions (left [n = 121]; right [n = 1]; mean lesion size, 1.8 cm). Cytology was positive for malignancy in 35 (29%), suspicious for malignancy in 1 (1%), atypical in 1 (1%), negative for malignancy in 81 (66%), and nondiagnostic in 4 (3%). No adverse events were reported. EUS-FNA diagnosed metastasis with a sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 97.4%, positive predictive value of 91.7%, and negative predictive value of 100%. When compared to percutaneous biopsy, lesion size (1.8 cm vs. 3.7 cm; P<.001) and biopsy site (99% vs. 62% left adrenal; P<.001) were significantly different. EUS-FNA adverse event rate was lower than percutaneous biopsy (0% vs. 4%; P = .024), but nondiagnostic rates were similar (3.3% vs. 4.8%; P = .48). EUS-FNA is a sensitive technique to sample adrenal lesions in patients at high risk for adrenal metastasis with fewer adverse events compared to percutaneous biopsy. CI = confidence interval CT = computed tomography EUS-FNA = endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration NPV = negative predictive value PPV = positive predictive value TUS = transabdominal ultra-sound.

Solid Pseudopapillary Neoplasms of the Pancreas: Evaluation of Diagnostic Utility of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA)

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is an important and accurate modality for the diagnosis of solid and cystic lesions of the pancreas. The objectives of this retrospective study are to review the pertinent cytologic criteria for diagnosing SPNs and to evaluate the diagnostic utility of EUS-FNA. A total of 924 pancreatic FNAs were performed at our institution from …

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) Contributes to a Triple Negative Test in Preoperative Screening of Pancreatic Cysts

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of pancreatic cysts obtains cyst fluid for cytologic and biochemical analysis, which may determine whether the cyst is mucinous and malignant, contributing to patient management. Despite this added value, EUS-FNA remains controversial in the preoperative assessment of pancreatic cysts. The objective of this study was to assess the utility of EUS-FNA in a cohort of small pancreatic cysts that were benign on imaging studies. METHODS: All pancreatic cysts that underwent initial EUS-FNA in 2006 and 2007 were retrospectively analyzed. Ninety-two patients with pancreatic cysts met the inclusion criteria. Patients who had high-risk or worrisome features on imaging studies were excluded. Cytology, histology, and cyst fluid analysis data were collected. The main outcome measurements were radiologic and clinical follow-up as well as cytopathologic and histologic results. RESULTS: EUS-FNA supported a diagnosis of a mucinous cyst in 38 of 92 patients (41%) by carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) measurement and/or cytology. Cytology demonstrated an absence of high-grade atypia (HGA) in 89 of 92 patients (97%). The mean follow-up was 4.4 years (range, 0-7.7 years), during which 6 cysts were surgically resected and 16 cysts were resampled by at least 1 subsequent EUS-FNA. The overall negative predictive value of cytologic examination for HGA was 99%. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-FNA is a screening test that contributes to a triple-negative test for pancreatic cysts—no high-risk stigmata, no worrisome features, and no HGA on cytology—providing a negative predictive value of 99% for conservative management. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2013;000:000-000. V C 2013 American Cancer Society.

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

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

Utility of EUS-FNA in the Diagnosis of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: Correlation with Histopathology in 76 Patients

Introduction: Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) are rare neoplasms that are classified as functional (F-NET) or nonfunctional (NF-NET) depending on the presence or absence of excess hormone production. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is often used to diagnose NETs but there are limited data on its sensitivity for this indication. Aim: To determine the sensitivity of EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of a NET. Methods: We retrospectively identified all patients from 7/95 to 11/06 who underwent EUS for suspected or subsequently confirmed pancreatic NET.