Search

Background: There is limited evidence on the comparative diagnostic performance of endoscopic tissue sampling techniques for subepithelial lesions. We performed a systematic review with network meta-analysis to compare these techniques., Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the sample adequacy and diagnostic accuracy of bite-on-bite biopsy, mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB), endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), and EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (FNB). Results were expressed as relative risk (RR) and 95%CI., Results: Eight RCTs were identified. EUS-FNB was significantly superior to EUS-FNA in terms of sample adequacy (RR 1.20 [95%CI 1.05-1.45]), whereas none of the other techniques significantly outperformed EUS-FNA. Additionally, bite-on-bite biopsy was significantly inferior to EUS-FNB (RR 0.55 [95%CI 0.33-0.98]). Overall, EUS-FNB appeared to be the best technique (surface under cumulative ranking [SUCRA] score 0.90) followed by MIAB (SUCRA 0.83), whereas bite-on-bite biopsy showed the poorest performance. When considering lesions <20 mm, MIAB, but not EUS-FNB, showed significantly higher accuracy rates compared with EUS-FNA (RR 1.68 [95%CI 1.02-2.88]). Overall, MIAB ranked as the best intervention for lesions <20 mm (SUCRA score 0.86 for adequacy and 0.91 for accuracy), with EUS-FNB only slightly superior to EUS-FNA. When rapid on-site cytological evaluation (ROSE) was available, no difference between EUS-FNB, EUS-FNA, and MIAB was observed., Conclusion: EUS-FNB and MIAB appeared to provide better performance, whereas bite-on-bite sampling was significantly inferior to the other techniques. MIAB seemed to be the best option for smaller lesions, whereas EUS-FNA remained competitive when ROSE was available., Competing Interests: S.F. Crinò is a consultant for Steris Endsocopy. A. Fugazza is a consultant for Boston Scientific. S. Carrara is a consultant for Olympus. B. Mangiavillano is a consultant for Taewoong Medical. A. Repici is a consultant for Boston Scientific and Medtronic, and has received grant support from Fujifilm. A. Facciorusso, M. Spadaccini, M. Colombo, D. Ramai, S. Chandan, P. Gkolfakis, B.P. Mohan, and C. Hassan declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Evidence is limited on the comparative diagnostic performance of tissue sampling techniques for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling of pancreatic masses. We performed a systematic review with network meta-analysis to compare these techniques., Methods: Rates of sample adequacy, blood contamination, and tissue integrity using fine-needle biopsy sampling needles were evaluated. Direct and indirect comparisons were performed among the slow-pull, dry-suction, modified wet-suction, or no-suction techniques. Results are expressed as risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI)., Results: Overall, 9 randomized controlled trials (756 patients) were identified. On network meta-analysis, the no-suction technique was significantly inferior to the other techniques (RR, .85 [95% CI, .78-.92] vs slow pull; RR, .85 [95% CI, .78-.92] vs dry suction; RR, .83 [95% CI, .76-.90] vs modified wet suction) in terms of sample adequacy. Consequently, modified wet suction was shown to be the best technique (surface under the cumulative ranking curve score, .90), with the no-suction technique showing poorer performance in terms of sample adequacy (surface under the cumulative ranking curve score, .14). Dry suction was associated with significantly higher rates of blood contamination as compared with the slow-pull technique (RR, 1.44; 95% CI, 1.15-1.80), whereas no suction led to less blood contamination of samples in comparison with other techniques (RR, .71 [95% CI, .52-.97] vs slow pull; RR, .49 [95% CI, .36-.66] vs dry suction; RR, .57 [95% CI, .40-.81] vs modified wet suction). The modified wet-suction technique significantly outperformed dry suction in terms of tissue integrity of the sample (RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.06-1.75)., Conclusions: Modified wet suction seemed to provide high rates of integrity and adequate samples, albeit with high blood contamination. The no-suction technique performed significantly worse than other sampling strategies., (Copyright © 2023 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS : Endoscopic ultrasound-guided through-the-needle biopsy (TTNB) of pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) is associated with a non-negligible risk for adverse events (AEs). We aimed to identify the hierarchic interaction among independent predictors for TTNB-related AEs and to generate a prognostic model using recursive partitioning analysis (RPA). PATIENTS AND METHODS : Multicenter retrospective analysis of 506 patients with PCLs who underwent TTNB. RPA of predictors for AEs was performed and the model was validated by means of bootstrap resampling. RESULTS : Mean cysts size was 36.7 mm. Most common diagnoses were intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN, 45 %), serous cystadenoma (18.8 %), and mucinous cystadenoma (12.8 %). Fifty-eight (11.5 %) AEs were observed. At multivariate analysis, age (odds ratio [OR] 1.32, 1.09-2.14; p = 0.05), number of TTNB passes (OR from 2.17, 1.32-4.34 to OR 3.16, 2.03-6.34 with the increase of the number of passes), complete aspiration of the cyst (OR 0.56, 0.31-0.95; p = 0.02), and diagnosis of IPMN (OR 4.16, 2.27-7.69; p < 0.001) were found to be independent predictors of AEs, as confirmed by logistic regression and random forest analyses. RPA identified three risk classes: high-risk (IPMN sampled with multiple microforceps passes, 28 % AEs rate), low-risk (1.4 % AE rate, including patients < 64 years with other-than-IPMN diagnosis sampled with ≤ 2 microforceps passes and with complete aspiration of the cyst) and middle-risk class (6.1 % AEs rate, including the remaining patients). CONCLUSION : TTNB should be selectively used in the evaluation of patients with IPMN. The present model could be applied during patient selection as to optimize the benefit/risk of TTNB., Competing Interests: S.F. Crinò has received speaker's fees from Steris Endoscopy. A. Larghi has provided consultancy to Pentax and Boston Scientific, and has received teaching fees from Medtronic and Boston Scientific. D. Yang has provided consultancy to Olympus, Boston Scientific, Lumendi, and Steris Endoscopy. P.V. Draganov has provided consultancy to Olympus, Boston Scientific, Cook Medical, Merit, Fujifilm, Microtech, Lumendi, and Steris. J.R. Aparicio has provided consultancy to Boston Scientific. C. Robles-Medranda has provided consultancy to Pentax Medical, Boston Scientific, Steris, Medtronic, Motus, Micro-tech, G-Tech Medical Supply, CREO Medical, and Mediconsgroup. A. Repici has provided consultancy to Boston Scientific and Medtronic, and has received grant support from Fujifilm. The remaining authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Opinion Statement: Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (GEP NENs) comprise a heterogeneous group of slow growing tumors arising from the neuroendocrine cells of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Although they are considered relatively rare, their incidence is rising and it is believed that the more frequent use of endoscopy and imaging studies have at least in part contributed to the increased diagnosis especially of localized neoplasms. The management of these neoplasms should be guided by a multidisciplinary NEN team following appropriate staging investigations. Localized neoplasms of the GI tract may be suitable for endoscopic therapy, while patients with pancreatic NENs, unsuitable for surgery, should be considered for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided ablation. In this review, we discuss the evidence regarding endoscopic resection of luminal NENs and EUS-guided therapy of pancreatic NENs. The efficacy, safety, and other longer-term outcomes of these techniques are summarized. In conclusion, this review of endoscopic therapies for localized NENs may be a useful guide for NEN clinicians and endoscopists who are considering these therapeutic options for the management of focal GEP NENs., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background and Aims: 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., Methods: 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., Results: 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., Conclusions: Franseen and Fork-tip needles, particularly 22-gauge size, showed the highest performance for tissue sampling of pancreatic masses, with low confidence in estimates., (Copyright © 2022 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: A direct comparison between endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) fine-needle biopsy (FNB) and current endoscopic biopsy techniques in patients with subepithelial lesions (SELs) is still lacking. Aim of this multicenter study was to compare the diagnostic performance and safety profile between EUS-FNB and bite-on-bite jumbo biopsy., Methods: Out of 416 patients undergoing endoscopic sampling of SELs between 2017 and 2021, after propensity score matching two groups were compared: 120 undergoing EUS-FNB and 120 sampled with bite-on-bite jumbo biopsy. Primary outcome was sample adequacy. Secondary outcomes were diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and adverse events., Results: Median age was 61 years and most patients were male in both groups. Final diagnosis was GIST in 65 patients (54.1%) in the EUS-FNB group and 62 patients in the bite-on-bite biopsy group (51.6%; p = 0.37). Sample adequacy was significantly higher in the EUS-FNB group as compared to the bite-on-bite biopsy group (94.1% versus 77.5%, p<0.001). EUS-FNB outperformed bite-on-bite biopsy also in terms of diagnostic accuracy (89.3% versus 67.1%, p<0.001) and sensitivity (89% vs 64.5%; p<0.001), whereas specificity was 100% in both groups (p = 0.89). These findings were confirmed in subgroup analysis according to SEL location, final diagnosis, and wall layers of the sampled SEL. Adverse event rate was 6.6% in the EUS-FNB group and 30% in the bite-on-bite biopsy group (p<0.001)., Conclusion: EUS-FNB outperforms bite-on-bite biopsy both in terms of diagnostic yield and safety profile., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest None declared., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: It is unclear whether patients with intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia harbor a higher risk of developing extrapancreatic malignancies., Aims: We performed a pooled estimate of the incidence of extrapancreatic malignancies in patients with intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia, with a particular focus on the comparison to the general population., Methods: Computerized bibliographic search of main databases was performed through February 2021. The primary endpoint was the pooled incidence of extrapancreatic malignancies in patients with intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms. Additional outcome was the comparison between intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia patients and the general population, expressed in terms of standardized incidence ratio along with 95% confidence intervals., Results: Eighteen studies with 8709 patients were included. The pooled rate of metachronous extrapancreatic malignancies was 10 (6-13)/1000 persons-year. No difference was observed according to intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia histology and sex, whereas a significantly superior incidence of extrapancreatic malignancies was observed in patients with main-duct (36.7%, 25.4%-48%) as compared to branch-duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia (26.2%, 17.6%-34.8%; p = 0.03). Pooled standardized incidence ratio comparing expected rates in the general population was 1.01 (0.79-1.29); no difference was observed concerning rates of metachronous gastric cancer (standardized incidence ratio 1.60, 0.72-3.54) and colorectal cancer (1.29, 0.92-1.18), whereas biliary cancer was observed more frequently in intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia patients (2.29, 1.07-4.93)., Conclusion: Patients with intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia harbor an overall rate of extrapancreatic malignancies as high as 27.3%. The rate of metachronous extrapancreatic malignancies is not superior to the general population., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: There is increasing evidence to support the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided through-the-needle biopsy (TTNB) technique as a means of sampling pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs). Results provide evidence demonstrating the benefits of this procedure over standard EUS fine-needle aspiration (FNA), thus supporting a push for its widespread implementation in clinical practice. Though this technique has demonstrated advantages, achieving these advantages in clinical practice is contingent upon careful considerations to ensure safety and efficacy., Areas Covered: The purpose of this review is to assess the level of evidence supporting the use of through-the-needle biopsy, revise its main technical and procedural characteristics, and to develop suggested guidelines outlining the safe assimilation of this device in clinical practice., Expert Opinion: EUS-TTNB enables more definitive and accurate diagnosis of PCLs by providing higher-quality histological samples. However, EUS-TTNB is not appropriate for all PCLs. Selection of suitable patients as well as morphology and risk factors of the cystic lesion is a crucial component of achieving the described benefits of this procedure while minimizing risks of adverse effects. Subjects with weak or absent indications for this procedure are susceptible to a range of complications and may even result in fatality.