Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 1/2017

01-01-2017

The presence of rapid on-site evaluation did not increase the adequacy and diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition of solid pancreatic lesions with core needle

Authors: Carlo Fabbri, Lorenzo Fuccio, Adele Fornelli, Filippo Antonini, Rosa Liotta, Leonardo Frazzoni, Alberto Larghi, Antonella Maimone, Silvia Paggi, Paolo Gusella, Luca Barresi, Anna Maria Polifemo, Elio Iovine, Giampiero Macarri, Vincenzo Cennamo, Ilaria Tarantino

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) improves the adequacy and accuracy of EUS-guided tissue acquisition, although it is not routinely widely available. Evidence suggested that core needles might overcome the absence of ROSE. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of ROSE on the adequacy and accuracy of EUS-guided tissue acquisition with core needles in patients with pancreatic solid lesions.

Methods

Patients who underwent EUS-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic mass lesions were retrospectively identified at three tertiary referral centers and those performed with the core needle were included. Adequacy, defined as the rate of cases in which a tissue specimen for proper examination was achieved, with and without ROSE was the primary outcome measure. The diagnostic accuracy and tissue core acquisition were the secondary outcome measures.

Results

A total of 333 patients with pancreatic solid mass lesions were included in the study; 140 cases sampled with ROSE and 193 cases without ROSE. The adequacy was 92.1 % in the group sampled with ROSE and 88.1 % in the group without ROSE (p = 0.227). In the ROSE group sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 90.7, 100 and 92.1 %, respectively. In the group without ROSE, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 87.2, 100, and 88.1 %, respectively. No difference for all these figures was observed between the two groups. The tissue core was available in 61.4 and 53.4 % of cases with and without ROSE, respectively (p = 0.143).

Conclusion

In the absence of ROSE, EUS-based tissue acquisition with Core needle should be considered since it achieves comparable tissue sampling adequacy and accuracy.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Erickson RA, Sayage-Rabie L, Beissner RS (2000) Factors predicting the number of EUS-guided fine-needle passes for diagnosis of pancreatic malignancies. Gastrointest Endosc 51:184–190CrossRefPubMed Erickson RA, Sayage-Rabie L, Beissner RS (2000) Factors predicting the number of EUS-guided fine-needle passes for diagnosis of pancreatic malignancies. Gastrointest Endosc 51:184–190CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Hawes RH (2010) The evolution of endoscopic ultrasound: improved imaging, higher accuracy for fine needle aspiration and the reality of endoscopic ultrasound-guided interventions. Curr Opin Gastroenterol 26:436–444PubMed Hawes RH (2010) The evolution of endoscopic ultrasound: improved imaging, higher accuracy for fine needle aspiration and the reality of endoscopic ultrasound-guided interventions. Curr Opin Gastroenterol 26:436–444PubMed
3.
go back to reference Hucl T, Wee E, Anuradha S, Gupta R et al (2013) Feasibility and efficiency of a new 22G core needle: a prospective comparison study. Endoscopy 45(10):792–798CrossRefPubMed Hucl T, Wee E, Anuradha S, Gupta R et al (2013) Feasibility and efficiency of a new 22G core needle: a prospective comparison study. Endoscopy 45(10):792–798CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Iglesias-Garcia J, Poley JW, Larghi A et al (2011) Feasibility and yield of a new EUS histology needle: results from a multicenter, pooled, cohort study. Gastrointest Endosc 73(6):1189–1196CrossRefPubMed Iglesias-Garcia J, Poley JW, Larghi A et al (2011) Feasibility and yield of a new EUS histology needle: results from a multicenter, pooled, cohort study. Gastrointest Endosc 73(6):1189–1196CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Larghi A, Iglesias-Garcia J, Poley JW et al (2013) Feasibility and yield of a novel 22-gauge histology EUS needle in patients with pancreatic masses: a multicenter prospective cohort study. Surg Endosc 27(10):3733–3738CrossRefPubMed Larghi A, Iglesias-Garcia J, Poley JW et al (2013) Feasibility and yield of a novel 22-gauge histology EUS needle in patients with pancreatic masses: a multicenter prospective cohort study. Surg Endosc 27(10):3733–3738CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Bang JY, Hebert-Magee S, Trevino J et al (2012) Randomized trial comparing the 22-gauge aspiration and 22-gauge biopsy needle for EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic mass lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 76:321–327CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Bang JY, Hebert-Magee S, Trevino J et al (2012) Randomized trial comparing the 22-gauge aspiration and 22-gauge biopsy needle for EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic mass lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 76:321–327CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Ashida R, Yasukawa S, Yanagisawa A et al (2014) Prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial of histological diagnostic yield comparing 25G EUS-FNA needles with and without a core trap in patients with solid pancreatic masses. Gastrointest Endosc 79(5s):AB111CrossRef Ashida R, Yasukawa S, Yanagisawa A et al (2014) Prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial of histological diagnostic yield comparing 25G EUS-FNA needles with and without a core trap in patients with solid pancreatic masses. Gastrointest Endosc 79(5s):AB111CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Wani S, Muthusamy R, Komanduri S et al (2014) Fine needle biopsy (FNB) is more cost-effective than fine needle aspiration (FNA) for endoscopic ultrasound guided tissue sampling: an economic analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 79(5S):AB189CrossRef Wani S, Muthusamy R, Komanduri S et al (2014) Fine needle biopsy (FNB) is more cost-effective than fine needle aspiration (FNA) for endoscopic ultrasound guided tissue sampling: an economic analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 79(5S):AB189CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Fabbri C, Luigiano C, Maimone A et al (2015) Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of small solid pancreatic lesions using a 22-gauge needle with side fenestration. Surg Endosc 29(6):1586–1590CrossRefPubMed Fabbri C, Luigiano C, Maimone A et al (2015) Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of small solid pancreatic lesions using a 22-gauge needle with side fenestration. Surg Endosc 29(6):1586–1590CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Habibzadeh F, Yadollahie M (2013) Number needed to misdiagnose: a measure of diagnostic test effectiveness. Epidemiology 24(1):170CrossRefPubMed Habibzadeh F, Yadollahie M (2013) Number needed to misdiagnose: a measure of diagnostic test effectiveness. Epidemiology 24(1):170CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Hewitt MJ, McPhail MJ, Possamai L et al (2012) EUS-guided FNA for diagnosis of solid pancreatic neoplasms: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 75:319–331CrossRefPubMed Hewitt MJ, McPhail MJ, Possamai L et al (2012) EUS-guided FNA for diagnosis of solid pancreatic neoplasms: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 75:319–331CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Hébert-Magee S, Bae S, Varadarajulu S et al (2013) The presence of a cytopathologist increases the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration cytology for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis. Cytopathology 24(3):159–171CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hébert-Magee S, Bae S, Varadarajulu S et al (2013) The presence of a cytopathologist increases the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration cytology for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis. Cytopathology 24(3):159–171CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Schmidt RL, Witt BL, Matynia AP et al (2013) Rapid on-site evaluation increases endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration adequacy for pancreatic lesions. Dig Dis Sci 58:872–882CrossRefPubMed Schmidt RL, Witt BL, Matynia AP et al (2013) Rapid on-site evaluation increases endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration adequacy for pancreatic lesions. Dig Dis Sci 58:872–882CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Wani S, Muthusamy VR, Komanduri S (2014) EUS-guided tissue acquisition: an evidence-based approach (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 80:939–959CrossRefPubMed Wani S, Muthusamy VR, Komanduri S (2014) EUS-guided tissue acquisition: an evidence-based approach (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 80:939–959CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Jhala NC, Jhala DN, Chieng DC et al (2003) Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration. A cytopathologist’s perspective. Am J Clin Pathol 120:351–367CrossRefPubMed Jhala NC, Jhala DN, Chieng DC et al (2003) Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration. A cytopathologist’s perspective. Am J Clin Pathol 120:351–367CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Larghi A, Eguia V, Hassan C et al (2014) Economic crisis: the right time to widen endoscopic ultrasound utilization. Endoscopy 46:80–81PubMed Larghi A, Eguia V, Hassan C et al (2014) Economic crisis: the right time to widen endoscopic ultrasound utilization. Endoscopy 46:80–81PubMed
18.
go back to reference Kalaitzakis E, Panos M, Sadik R et al (2009) Clinicians’ attitudes towards endoscopic ultrasound: a survey of four European countries. Scand J Gastroenterol 44:100–107CrossRefPubMed Kalaitzakis E, Panos M, Sadik R et al (2009) Clinicians’ attitudes towards endoscopic ultrasound: a survey of four European countries. Scand J Gastroenterol 44:100–107CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Dumonceau JM, Koessler T, van Hooft JE, Fockens P (2012) Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine needle aspiration: relatively low sensitivity in the endosonographer population. World J Gastroenterol 18(19):2357–2363CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Dumonceau JM, Koessler T, van Hooft JE, Fockens P (2012) Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine needle aspiration: relatively low sensitivity in the endosonographer population. World J Gastroenterol 18(19):2357–2363CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
go back to reference Lee YN, Moon JH, Kim HK et al (2014) Core biopsy needle versus standard aspiration needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a randomized parallel-group study. Endoscopy 46:1056–1062CrossRefPubMed Lee YN, Moon JH, Kim HK et al (2014) Core biopsy needle versus standard aspiration needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a randomized parallel-group study. Endoscopy 46:1056–1062CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Vanbiervliet G, Napoleon B, Saint Paul MC et al (2014) Core needle versus standard needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy of solid pancreatic masses: a randomized crossover study. Endoscopy 46:1063–1070CrossRefPubMed Vanbiervliet G, Napoleon B, Saint Paul MC et al (2014) Core needle versus standard needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy of solid pancreatic masses: a randomized crossover study. Endoscopy 46:1063–1070CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
The presence of rapid on-site evaluation did not increase the adequacy and diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition of solid pancreatic lesions with core needle
Authors
Carlo Fabbri
Lorenzo Fuccio
Adele Fornelli
Filippo Antonini
Rosa Liotta
Leonardo Frazzoni
Alberto Larghi
Antonella Maimone
Silvia Paggi
Paolo Gusella
Luca Barresi
Anna Maria Polifemo
Elio Iovine
Giampiero Macarri
Vincenzo Cennamo
Ilaria Tarantino
Publication date
01-01-2017
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 1/2017
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-016-4960-4

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

Surgical Endoscopy 1/2017 Go to the issue