Search

Background and Aims Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is typically diagnosed at a late stage. Little is known about the incidental finding of early-stage PDAC. The aim of the current study was to determine the etiology of small solid pancreatic lesions (≤15 mm) to optimize clinical management. Methods Inclusion criterion for the retrospective study analysis was the incidental finding of primarily undetermined small solid pancreatic lesions ≤15 mm in 394 asymptomatic patients. Final diagnoses were based on histology or cytology obtained by imaging-guided biopsy (and at least 12-month follow-up) and/or surgery. Contrast-enhanced US or contrast-enhanced EUS was performed in 219 patients. Results The final diagnoses of 394 patients were as follows: 146 PDACs, 156 neuroendocrine tumors, 28 metastases into the pancreas from other primary sites, and 64 various other etiologies. Contrast-enhanced US allowed differential diagnosis of PDAC and non-PDAC in 189 of 219 patients (86%). Conclusions Approximately 40% of patients with small solid pancreatic lesions had very early stage PDAC. Approximately 60% of small solid pancreatic lesions ≤15 mm are not PDAC and, therefore, do not require radical surgery. Without preoperative diagnosis, an unacceptably large proportion of patients would be exposed to radical surgery with significant morbidity and mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Evidence is limited on the comparative diagnostic performance of newer end-cutting fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles for tissue sampling of pancreatic masses. We performed a systematic review with network meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic accuracy of available FNB needles for sampling of solid pancreatic lesions. A systematic literature review (Medline and Cochrane Database) was conducted for studies evaluating the accuracy of newer FNB needles in adults undergoing EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy. Secondary outcomes were sample adequacy, diagnostic sensitivity, specificity, and adverse event rate. We performed pairwise and network meta-analyses and appraised the quality of evidence using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Overall, 16 RCTs (1934 patients) were identified. On network meta-analysis, Franseen needles (Acquire; Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Mass, USA) significantly outperformed reverse-bevel needles (risk ratio [RR], 1.21 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.05-1.40] for accuracy and 1.31 [95% CI, 1.05-1.22] for adequacy) and FNA needles (RR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.01-1.25] for accuracy and 1.07 [95% CI, 1.02-1.13] for adequacy). Likewise, the Fork-tip needle (SharkCore; Medtronic, Dublin, Ireland) was significantly superior to the reverse-bevel needle (RR, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.03-1.33] for accuracy and 1.09 [95% CI, 1.02-1.16] for adequacy) and to the FNA needle (RR, 1.09 [95% CI, 1.01-1.19] for accuracy and 1.03 [95% CI, 1.01-1.07] for adequacy). Other comparisons did not achieve statistical significance. As a consequence, Franseen (surface under the cumulative ranking score,.89 for accuracy and.94 for adequacy) and Fork-tip needles (surface under the cumulative ranking score,.76 for accuracy and.73 for adequacy) ranked as the 2 highest-performing FNB needles. When considering different needle sizes, 25-gauge Franseen and 25-gauge Fork-tip needles were not superior to 22-gauge reverse-bevel needles (RR, 1.18 [95% CI,.96-1.46] and 1.04 [95% CI,.62-1.52]). None of the tested needles was significantly superior to the other FNB devices or to FNA needles when rapid onsite cytologic evaluation was available. Franseen and Fork-tip needles, particularly 22-gauge size, showed the highest performance for tissue sampling of pancreatic masses, with low confidence in estimates. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Gastric juice is usually discarded during upper-GI endoscopy. Objective: By using a novel device, the Mt 21-42, we evaluated the potential of this important organic fluid in clinical practice, exploring its contribution to the diagnosis of Helicobacter pylori infection and atrophic gastritis of the oxyntic mucosa (AGOM). Design and Patients: A multicenter study (17,907 patients; 10 endoscopy units) estimated the frequency of diagnosis of AGOM and H pylori infection in routine endoscopic practice. A prospective study (216 patients) at 1 of these units aimed to determine the real prevalence of these conditions and the possible benefits of gastric juice analysis. We considered gastric juice pH and ammonium concentration, endoscopic and histologic features, serologic parameters for atrophy and H pylori, gastric acid secretion, and costs. Results: We found that H pylori infection and, even more markedly, AGOM were greatly underdiagnosed in routine endoscopic practice (20.1% and 0.8% vs 49.1% and 12.5% in the prospective study, respectively), because of the intrinsic limitations of the conventional tests and lack/inappropriateness of biopsy planning. Gastric-juice analysis proved to be a cheap, simple, and effective way to prevent such underdiagnosis and allowed detection of atrophic gastritis and H pylori in 96% and 98% of cases, and saved costs (cost-effectiveness ratio 209 vs 274-5047). Conclusions: Gastric juice provided a valuable source of clinicopathologic information that, properly analyzed, allowed detection of the main risk factors for gastric cancer (H pylori and atrophic gastritis), overcoming the diagnostic limitations associated with these conditions and also producing time and cost savings. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs) carry a considerable malignancy risk. Along with main duct dilation, the presence of enhanced mural nodules represents a significant risk factor for malignancy. Several articles assessed the role of contrast-enhanced EUS (CE-EUS) for the identification of malignant features in mural nodules. We evaluate the pooled diagnostic performance of CE-EUS for the identification of high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma among mural nodules in PCNs. A systematic review (Medline, PubMed, EMBASE) and meta-analysis were conducted. Subgroup analysis was used to assess the usefulness of a dedicated contrast-harmonic (CH-EUS). The primary outcome was pooled sensitivity for identification of high-grade dysplasia or invasive carcinoma. Ten studies (532 patients) were included. Pooled sensitivity of CE-EUS was 88.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 82.7%-92.5%), specificity 79.1% (95% CI, 74.5%-83.3%), and diagnostic accuracy 89.6% (95% CI, 83.4%-95.8%). Eight studies (320 patients) were conducted using CH-EUS: pooled sensitivity increased to 97.0% (95% CI, 92.5%-99.2%), specificity to 90.4% (95% CI, 85.2%-94.2%), and diagnostic accuracy to 95.6% (95% CI, 92.6%-98.7%). At 42% disease prevalence (pretest probability), a positive CH-EUS increased the disease probability to 88%, whereas a negative test decreased the disease probability to 2%. The number needed to diagnose was 1.5 (95% CI, 1.7-1.3) for CE-EUS and just 1.2 (95% CI, 1.3-1.1) for CH-EUS. This study provided robust evidence on CE-EUS value for the characterization of mural nodules within PCNs. A dedicated contrast-harmonic mode, namely CH-EUS, provided an increased diagnostic yield in the identification and characterization of malignant mural nodules. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) is the criterion standard for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions. Several studies assessed the role of repeat EUS-FNA (rEUS-FNA) after an inconclusive examination. Our aim was to evaluate the pooled diagnostic accuracy of rEUS-FNA after a nondiagnostic result. We conducted systematic research on electronic databases (Medline, PubMed, EMBASE) and a meta-analysis to obtain pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio. A summary receiver operating characteristic curve was used to calculate area under the curve. Subgroup analysis was used to assess the role of rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE). Twelve studies (505 patients) were included. Sensitivity was 77% (66%-86%), specificity 98% (78%-100%), and positive and negative predictive values 99% (98%-100%) and 61 (60%-63%), respectively. At 73% of disease prevalence (pretest probability), positive rEUS-FNA increased the disease probability to 99%, whereas a negative result decreased the disease probability to 39%. The sensitivity was 83% (64%-93%) and specificity 98% (80%-100%) when ROSE was available and 65% (57%-73%) and 94% (31%-100%) when not available. The number needed to diagnose was 1.2 (1.1-2.3) and 1.7 (1.4-8.3) in ROSE-positive and ROSE-negative cases, respectively. The number of correctly diagnosed cases increased from 6 (1-7) to 8 (4-9) of 10 patients without and with ROSE, respectively. This study objectively substantiated the added value of rEUS-FNA for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses in cases of a previous nondiagnostic or inconclusive result. Moreover, our data suggested that ROSE may be beneficial in this setting, because it increased the proportion of definitive diagnoses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims The use of contrast-harmonic EUS (CH-EUS) in routine clinical practice is increasing rapidly but is not yet standardized. We present the levels of evidence (LEs) found in the literature to put its clinical outcomes in the appropriate perspective. Methods We conducted a systematic review of the available English-language articles. The LEs were stratified according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine guidelines. Results Overall, 210 articles were included and presented according to different pathologic conditions. For pancreatic solid neoplasms, the pooled sensitivity and specificity in the diagnosis of pancreatic carcinoma were very high (LE 1); quantitative analysis and guidance of FNA were reported as investigational research (LE 2-3). For pancreatic cystic lesions, the identification of neoplastic solid components as hyperenhanced lesions represented a promising application of CH-EUS (LE 2). For lymph nodes, CH-EUS increased the diagnostic yield of B-mode EUS for the detection of malignancy (LE 2). For submucosal tumors, CH-EUS seemed useful for differential diagnosis and risk stratification (LE 2-3). For other applications, differential diagnosis of gallbladder and vascular abnormalities by CH-EUS were reported (LE 2-3). Conclusions The LEs of CH-EUS in the literature have evolved from the initial descriptive studies to multicenter and prospective trials, and even meta-analyses. The differential diagnosis between benign and malignant lesions is the main field of application of CH-EUS. With regard to pancreatic solid neoplasms, the concomitant use of both CH-EUS and EUS-FNA may have additive value in increasing the overall accuracy by overcoming the false-negative results associated with each individual technique. Other applications are promising but still investigational. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: EUS-guided FNA or biopsy sampling is widely practiced. Optimal sonographic visualization of the needle is critical for image-guided interventions. Of the several commercially available needles, bench-top testing and direct comparison of these needles have not been done to reveal their inherent echogenicity. The aims are to provide bench-top data that can be used to guide clinical applications and to promote future device research and development., Methods: Descriptive bench-top testing and comparison of 8 commonly used EUS-FNA needles (all size 22 gauge): SonoTip Pro Control (Medi-Globe); Expect Slimline (Boston Scientific); EchoTip, EchoTip Ultra, EchoTip ProCore High Definition (Cook Medical); ClearView (Conmed); EZ Shot 2 (Olympus); and BNX (Beacon Endoscopic), and 2 new prototype needles, SonoCoat (Medi-Globe), coated by echogenic polymers made by Encapson. Blinded evaluation of standardized and unedited videos by 43 EUS endoscopists and 17 radiologists specialized in GI US examination who were unfamiliar with EUS needle devices., Results: There was no significant difference in the ratings and rankings of these needles between endosonographers and radiologists. Overall, 1 prototype needle was rated as the best, ranking 10% to 40% higher than all other needles (P < .01). Among the commercially available needles, the EchoTip Ultra needle and the ClearView needle were top choices. The EZ Shot 2 needle was ranked statistically lower than other needles (30%-75% worse, P < .001)., Conclusions: All FNA needles have their inherent and different echogenicities, and these differences are similarly recognized by EUS endoscopists and radiologists. Needles with polymeric coating from the entire shaft to the needle tip may offer better echogenicity., (Copyright © 2016 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. All rights reserved.)