Diagnosis of a remote neuroendocrine tumor thrombus by EUS-guided FNA.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Dhaliwal L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7003146 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6732263 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6669307 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and aimsAlthough conventional EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) has previously been considered first-line for sampling subepithelial lesions (SELs), variable accuracy has resulted in increased use of fine-needle biopsy (FNB) sampling to improve diagnostic yield. The primary aim of this study was to compare FNA versus FNB sampling for the diagnosis of SELs.MethodsThis was a multicenter, retrospective study to evaluate the outcomes of EUS-FNA and EUS-guided FNB sampling (EUS-FNB) of SELs over a 3-year period. Demographics, lesion characteristics, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, number of needle passes, diagnostic adequacy of rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE), cell block accuracy, and adverse events were analyzed. Subgroup analyses were performed comparing FNA versus FNB sampling by location and diagnostic yield with or without ROSE. Multivariable logistic regression was also performed.ResultsTwo hundred twenty-nine patients with SELs (115 FNA and 114 FNB sampling) underwent EUS-guided sampling. Mean patient age was 60.86 ± 12.84 years. Most lesions were gastric in location (75.55%) and from the fourth layer (71.18%). Cell block for FNB sampling required fewer passes to achieve conclusive diagnosis (2.94 ± 1.09 vs 3.55 ± 1.55; P = .003). The number of passes was not different for ROSE adequacy (P = .167). Immunohistochemistry was more able to be successfully performed in more FNB sampling samples (69.30% vs 40.00%; P < .001). Overall, sensitivity and accuracy were superior for FNB sampling versus FNA (79.41% vs 51.92% [P = .001] and 88.03% vs 77.19% [P = .030], respectively). On subgroup analysis, sensitivity and accuracy of FNB sampling alone was superior to FNA + ROSE (79.03% vs 46.67% [P = .001] and 87.25% vs 68.00% [P = .024], respectively). There was no significant difference in diagnostic yield of FNB sampling alone versus FNB sampling + ROSE (P > .05). Multivariate analysis showed no predictors associated with accuracy. One minor adverse event was reported in the FNA group.ConclusionsEUS-FNB was superior to EUS-FNA in the diagnosis of SELs. EUS-FNB was also superior to EUS-FNA alone and EUS-FNA + ROSE. These results suggest EUS-FNB should be considered a first-line modality and may suggest a reduced role for ROSE in the diagnosis of SELs. However, a large randomized controlled trial is required to confirm our findings.
| S-EPMC7340004 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMultiple studies have investigated sampling adequacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (pNENs). However, none have described the diagnostic performance of EUS-FNA for pNENs, or the influencing factors. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA, with post-operative pathological diagnosis as the gold standard, and factors predictive of inadequate EUS sampling.MethodsFrom 1998 to 2014, a total of 698 patients underwent pancreatic resection and 1455 patients underwent EUS-FNA sampling for pancreatic lesions. A total of 410 cases underwent both surgical resection and preceding EUS-FNA. Of these, 60 cases (49 true pNEN, nine non-diagnostic, two misdiagnoses) were included. We studied diagnostic performance of EUS-FNA and factors that were associated with failed diagnosis.ResultsOf the 60 cases, EUS-FNA yield was 49 true-positive cases, two misdiagnoses, and nine non-diagnostic cases (including six suggestive cases). Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 84.5, 99.4, and 97.3 %, respectively; including the six suggestive cases, diagnostic values were 94.8 % sensitivity (55/58), 99.4 % specificity (350/352), and 98.7 % accuracy (405/410). In multivariate analysis, sampling adequacy rates were significantly lower when lesions were located in the pancreatic head [odds ratio (OR) = 10.0] and in tumor-rich stromal fibrosis (OR = 10.45). Tumor size, needle type, tumor grading, presence of cystic component, and time period were not significant factors.ConclusionsEUS-FNA offers high accuracy for pNEN. However, location of the tumor in the pancreatic head and presence of rich stromal fibrosis negatively impacts sampling adequacy.
| S-EPMC4990623 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Specimens collected by fine needle are microscopic and contain blood; therefore, the presence of a target specimen within a sample is often difficult to confirm. Although rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy (EUS-FNA) is beneficial, many health care facilities are unable to apply this technique due to a lack of cytopathologists. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a device that detects the target specimen within pancreatic tumor EUS-FNA samples.Fifty-eight consecutive patients with solid pancreatic masses were studied for a preliminary case series at a tertiary-care university hospital (Tottori University Hospital, Yonago, Japan). The material collected was checked with a target sample check illuminator (TSCI) and was evaluated by one cytopathologist.The agreement rate between the TSCI and histopathology was 93.7 %. Further testing procedures were not needed in 91.4 % of patients, and the mean number of needle punctures was 1.2 after a single pass using TSCI. No adverse events were encountered with the procedure.With the introduction of the TSCI in EUS-FNA, it became possible to both collect the minimum necessary target samples by EUS-FNA and to end further procedures, even without performing ROSE.
| S-EPMC4683133 | biostudies-other
Project description:Pancreatic cancer has one of the worst prognoses among all malignancies and few available treatment options. Patient-derived xenografts can be used to develop personalized therapy for pancreatic cancer. Endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) may provide a powerful alternative to surgery for obtaining sufficient tissue for the establishment of patient-derived xenografts. In this study, EUS-FNA samples were obtained for 30 patients referred to the Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. These samples were used for xenotransplantation in NOD-SCID mice and for genetic analyses. The gene expression of pancreatic-cancer-relevant genes in xenograft tumors was examined by immunohistochemistry. Targeted sequencing of both the patient-derived tumors and xenograft tumors was performed. The xenografts' susceptibility to oncolytic virus infection was studied by infecting xenograft-derived cells with VSV∆51-GFP. The xenograft take rate was found to be 75.9% for passage 1 and 100% for passage 2. Eighty percent of patient tumor samples were successfully sequenced to a high depth for 42 cancer genes. Xenograft histological characteristics and marker expression were maintained between passages. All tested xenograft samples were susceptible to oncoviral infection. We found that EUS-FNA is an accessible, minimally invasive technique that can be used to acquire adequate pancreatic cancer tissue for the generation of patient-derived xenografts and for genetic sequencing.
| S-EPMC11311391 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesPrognosis of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PanNENs) mostly depend on tumor stage and grade, determined by Ki-67 labeling index. EUS-FNA is considered the gold-standard technique to obtain it. The aims of our study were to establish diagnostic accuracy of preoperative EUS-FNA Ki-67 evaluation considering final pathological assessment on surgical specimen as gold standard and to investigate the possible impact on prognosis of misclassification.MethodsThis is a retrospective study from a prospectively collected database. EUS-FNA grading (eG) and surgical one (sG) measured according to Ki-67 proliferative index values, according to 2017 WHO classification, were compared. eG-sG correlation was evaluated by Spearman index. Logistic regression investigated factors associated with misclassification. Prognostic difference in terms of progression-free survival was evaluated by Kaplan Meier method.ResultsOne hundred and twelve PanNENs patients enrolled. In 13.4% of patients (15/112) EUS-FNA "undergraded" patients (eG1 vs. sG2), while in 12.5% (n = 14) it "overgraded" PanNENs (eG2 to sG1). No misclassifications in G3 patients. In patients with tumors <20 mm (n = 44), 2 (4.5%) eG1 and 10 (22.7%) eG2 were finally classified respectively as G2 and G1 at surgical histology. No factors, as i.e. the lesions' size or their morphological aspect, were associated with misclassification. In overgraded PanNENs, no progression occurred, while in patients correctly classified/undergraded the progression rate was 14.3%.ConclusionsThis is the largest cohort of surgical PanNENs with preoperative EUS-FNA grading evaluation. Despite an acceptable eG-sG correlation, about 25% of patients are misclassified. Clinical impact of misclassification should be carefully considered especially in small tumors undergoing observation.
| S-EPMC8544016 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and study aims Accurate diagnosis and risk stratification of pancreatic cysts (PCs) is challenging. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the feasibility, safety, and diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided through-the-needle biopsy (TTNB) versus fine-needle aspiration (FNA) in PCs. Methods Comprehensive search of databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Web of Science) for relevant studies on TTNB of PCs (from inception to June 2019). The primary outcome was to compare the pooled diagnostic yield and concordance rate with surgical pathology of TTNB histology and FNA cytology of PCs. The secondary outcome was to estimate the safety profile of TTNB. Results: Eight studies (426 patients) were included. The diagnostic yield was significantly higher with TTNB over FNA for a specific cyst type (OR: 9.4; 95 % CI: [5.7-15.4]; I 2 = 48) or a mucinous cyst (MC) (OR: 3.9; 95 % CI: [2.0-7.4], I 2 = 72 %). The concordance rate with surgical pathology was significantly higher with TTNB over FNA for a specific cyst type (OR: 13.5; 95 % CI: [3.5-52.3]; I 2 = 48), for a MC (OR: 8.9; 95 % [CI: 1.9-40.8]; I 2 = 29), and for MC histologic severity (OR: 10.4; 95 % CI: [2.9-36.9]; I 2 = 0). The pooled sensitivity and specificity of TTNB for MCs were 90.1 % (95 % CI: [78.4-97.6]; I 2 = 36.5 %) and 94 % (95 % CI: [81.5-99.7]; I 2 = 0), respectively. The pooled adverse event rate was 7.0 % (95 % CI: [2.3-14.1]; I 2 = 82.9). Conclusions TTNB is safe, has a high sensitivity and specificity for MCs and may be superior to FNA cytology in risk-stratifying MCs and providing a specific cyst diagnosis.
| S-EPMC7164999 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundLinear endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) allows the visualization, identification, and characterization of the extent of lesions of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract and adjacent structures. EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) facilitates a more accurate diagnosis of mediastinal, intra-abdominal, and pancreatic lesions through the collection of the cytological material under direct visualization. Recent reports suggest that histological samples can be obtained by EUS-FNA with a reverse, bevel-tipped needle (the ProCore needle) to collect the core samples (fine needle biopsy, FNB), thereby adding a new dimension to the diagnostic usefulness of this technique. Certain neoplasms, such as lymphoma and stromal tumors, can be assessed by EUS-FNB to confirm the diagnosis. Here, we aimed to carry out a prospective, multicenter, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial to compare EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA.Methods/designA total of 408 patients will be enrolled from five endoscopic centers. Patients will be divided into two groups: (1) group A, which is the EUS regular needle group (EUS-FNA) and (2) group B, which is the EUS ProCore needle group (EUS-FNB). Patients in group A will be examined with a 22G EchoTip Ultra needle, and patients in group B, with a 22G EchoTip ProCore needle. For all included patients, four EUS-guided passes will be made in each lesion. In the first and second pass, a slow-pull suction method of the stylet will be done. The third and fourth pass will use manual suction of 5 cc. The primary objective is to compare the diagnostic yield of malignancy by EUS-FNA versus EUS-FNB.DiscussionThe trial will compare samples obtained by EUS-FNA versus EUS-FNB for the diagnostic yield of solid lesions. The efficacy of these two sampling methods will be assessed on various lesions, which may provide insights into developing practice guidelines for their future indications.Trial registrationClinical Trials.gov, NCT02327065 .
| S-EPMC4830051 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) for gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions (SELs) has limited diagnostic accuracy due to technical problems and small lesion size. We previously reported a novel submucosal tunneling biopsy (STB) technique for sampling SELs. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic ability and safety of STB compared to that of FNA for SELs.The study was a non-randomized, prospective comparative study with crossover design in patients with endoluminal gastric SELs. Forty-three patients, including 29 cases with lesions < 2 cm were enrolled. A crossover design with 2 intervention stages (Group A: FNA followed by STB for 23 SELs, Group B: STB followed by FNA for 20 SELs) was implemented. The primary outcome was the diagnostic yield (DY). Secondary outcomes were technical success rate, procedure time, complication rate, and sample quality.The DY of STB was significantly higher than that of FNA (100 % vs. 34.8 %; P < 0.0001) in group A, including 100 % in overall STB. The technical success rate of STB was significantly higher than that of FNA (100 % vs. 56.5 %; P = 0.0006), whereas the median procedure time of STB was significantly longer than that of FNA (37 minutes vs. 18 minutes; P < 0.0001). The median specimen area of STB samples was markedly larger than that of FNA samples (5.54 mm 2 vs. 0.69 mm 2 ; P < 0.001). No complications occurred in either method. STB had significantly superior diagnostic ability and a more adequate sample quality than FNA for endoluminal gastric SELs, indicating the suitability of STB for small SELs.UMIN 000006754.
| S-EPMC5542816 | biostudies-other