Contrast-enhanced guided endoscopic ultrasound procedures.

Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound (CH-EUS) can overcome the limitations of endoscopic ultrasound-guided acquisition by identifying microvessels inside inhomogeneous tumours and improving the characterization of these tumours. Despite the initial enthusiasm that oriented needle sampling under CH-EUS guidance could provide better diagnostic yield in pancreatic solid lesions, further studies did not confirm the supplementary values in cases of tissue acquisition guided by CH-EUS. This review details the knowledge based on the available data on contrast-guided procedures. The indications for CH-EUS tissue acquisition include isoechoic EUS lesions with poor visible delineation where CH-EUS can differentiate the lesion vascularisation from the surrounding parenchyma and also the mural nodules within biliopancreatic cystic lesions, which occur in select cases. Additionally, the roles of CH-EUS-guided therapy in patients whose pancreatic fluid collections or bile ducts that have an echogenic content have indications for drainage, and patients who have nonvisualized vessels that need to be highlighted via Doppler EUS are presented. Another indication is represented if there is a need for an immediate assessment of the post-radiofrequency ablation of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours, in which case CH-EUS can be used to reveal the incomplete tumour destruction.

Clinical Utility of the Contrast-Enhanced Endoscopic Ultrasound Guided Fine Needle Aspiration in the Diagnosis of Pancreatic Cyst.

Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) cytology from an intracystic fluid is useful in the differentiation of pancreatic cysts, with low sensitivity, which increases when the solid component is targeted. The clinical utility of contrast-enhanced guided EUS-FNA (CH-EUS-FNA) in the solid component is not known. We aimed to assess the diagnostic value of CH-EUS-FNA in enhanced mural nodules and discrimination between different cysts using contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound (CH-EUS). The prospective study recruited patients with pancreatic cysts with an unclear diagnosis. The CH-EUS was followed by CH-EUS-FNA. The final diagnosis was based on surgery or the correlation between clinical history, cross-sectional imaging, echoendoscopic morphology, cystic fluid analysis, and follow-up. Fifty-eight patients with pancreatic cysts were evaluated. The mucinous cysts had wall arterial enhancement more often than non- mucinous cysts (p < 0.0001), with 90.2% sensitivity and 70.6% specificity. The CH-EUS-FNA from cystic fluid and mural nodules identified mucinous cysts and malignancy with 82.4% and 84.2% sensitivity and 92% and 100% specificity. Twenty-one cysts had solid components, but only 13 were enhanced mural nodules on EUS assessment with conclusive cytology in all cases and malignancy in 76.9%. Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound should be completed in all PCN with solid components in order to avoid unnecessary EUS-FNA and to guide FNA for the identification of malignant cysts.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy versus Fine-Needle Aspiration in the Diagnosis of Focal Liver Lesions: Prospective Head-to-Head Comparison.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) or fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) from focal liver lesions are indicated in selected cases, but there has been no previous comparison of needle types of the same size. The aim of our study was to compare the histologic diagnostic accuracy and adequacy of cores obtained with EUS-FNB needles in contrast to those obtained with FNA needles in focal liver lesions. This prospective one-center study included patients with left lobe hepatic focal lesions with contraindications for percutaneous liver biopsy or need for EUS for concomitant lesions. Each patient had one pass of 22G EUS-FNB (Franseen) needle and one pass of 22G EUS-FNA in a crossover manner, without macroscopic on-site evaluation. Each sample was analyzed separately for histologic adequacy and diagnosis. The final diagnosis was based on histology results or on imaging follow-up in the case of negative biopsies. The EUS-FNB samples (n = 30) were found to be more adequate for histologic analysis, with more cellularity and longer tissue aggregates than the EUS-FNA samples (n = 30). The accuracy of EUS-FNB was 100%, whereas that of EUS-FNA was 86.7% (p = 0.039). No post-procedure complications were noted. The 22G EUS-FNB needle proved superior to 22G EUS-FNA in terms of tissue acquisition diagnostic accuracy and histologic adequacy in focal liver lesions.

Direct Comparison of Elastography Endoscopic Ultrasound Fine-Needle Aspiration and B-Mode Endoscopic Ultrasound Fine-Needle Aspiration in Diagnosing Solid Pancreatic Lesions.

Elastography endoscopic ultrasound (E-EUS) has been proved to be a valuable supplement to endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in differentiating solid pancreatic lesions, but the improvement of EUS-FNA guided during E-EUS has not been proven. Our study aimed to evaluate whether E-EUS fine-needle aspiration (E-EUS-FNA) was superior to B-mode EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses and whether the diagnostic rate was affected by specific factors. Our prospective study was conducted between 2019-2020 by recruiting patients with solid pancreatic masses. E-EUS examination was followed by one pass of E-EUS-FNA towards the blue part of the lesion and a second pass of EUS-FNA. The final diagnosis was based on surgery, E-EUS-FNA or EUS-FNA results, or a 12-month follow-up. Sixty patients with solid pancreatic lesions were evaluated. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for diagnosing malignancy using E-EUS-FNA and EUS-FNA were 89.5%, 100%, 90%, 93%, 100%, and 93.3%, respectively, but the differences were not significant. Neither mass location nor the lesion size influenced the results. The lengths of the core obtained during E-EUS-FNA and EUS-FNA were similar. E-EUS-FNA in solid pancreatic lesions was not superior to B-mode EUS-FNA.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-fine needle aspiration of solid pancreatic masses: Do we need the fourth pass? A prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is important for the differential diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions. Sample adequacy is related to the number of needle passes, and European guidelines recommend three to four needle passes with a standard EUS-FNA needle. We aimed to evaluate the optimal number of passes with standard EUS-FNA needles in solid pancreatic lesions. METHODS: Patients with solid pancreatic masses without cystic component >20% on computed tomography scan, and without biliary metallic stents, or coagulation problems were included prospectively. Standard 22G needles were used (maximum four passes); each sample was paraffin-embedded and analyzed separately. Final diagnosis was established by EUS-FNA, repeat EUS-FNA, surgery, or follow-up. RESULTS: Sixty-one of 65 patients were included. The final diagnoses were adenocarcinoma (n = 44, 72%), neuroendocrine tumor (NET) (n = 10, 16%), metastasis (n = 1, 4%) and nonmalignant lesion (n = 6, 10%). Immunohistochemical staining was possible in 17 cases. The diagnosis was established by the first pass in 62% of cases (n = 38), by the second in 15% (n = 9), by the third in 15% (n = 9), and by the fourth in 3% (n = 2). The diagnostic accuracy for all four passes compared to the first three passes was 95% vs 92% (P = .5). The contribution of the fourth pass was not different between adenocarcinoma and NET (2% vs 10%, respectively; P = .667). CONCLUSION: Three passes with standard EUS-FNA was optimal for a specific diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses, regardless of the histological type of the lesion.

What is the Impact of the Proportion of Solid Necrotic Content on the Number of Necrosectomies during EUS-Guided Drainage using Lumen-Apposing Metallic Stents of Pancreatic Walled-off Necrosis ?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The fully-covered, lumen apposing metal stents are designed for one step placement, facilitating the direct endoscopic necrosectomy into the walled-off pancreatic necrosis. However, the prediction of the number of necrosectomy sessions in these patients is not known. This study evaluated the association between the proportion of solid necrotic material inside walled-off necrosis, as assessed during the endosonography placement of a lumen apposing metal stent, and the number of necrosectomies subsequently required. METHODS: Patients from three tertiary medical centers with symptomatic walled off pancreatic necrosis (pain, infection, gastric/biliary obstruction) at more than 4 weeks after onset of acute pancreatitis were retrospectively analysed. Proportion of solid necrotic debris was estimated during endosonography procedure of lumen apposing metal stents placement. Necrosectomy was performed when obstruction or inflammation occurred subsequently. Lumen apposing metal stents were removed after clearance of necrotic content. RESULTS: In 46 patients with successful lumen apposing metal stents placement, necrosectomy was performed in 39 patients (72.78%). Performance of 3 or more necrosectomies was significantly associated with more than 50% pancreatic necrosis (p=0.032), but not with walled-off pancreatic necrosis size or location. Necrotic infection during lumen apposing metal stents stenting was associated with hypoalbuminemia, but not with necrosectomy requirement. Clinical success after a median follow-up of 13.37 months was 87%. CONCLUSIONS: Walled-off pancreatic necrosis with more than 50% solid necrotic content were associated with more necrosectomy procedures, requiering longer endoscopy time, intravenous sedations, and higher costs.

Case report of abdominal left upper quadrant collection secondary to fish bone perforation.

We present an unusual case of an intra-abdominal collection which evidenced a rare etiology and raises diagnostic particularities. BACKGROUND: Fish bones ingestion is frequent, but seldom followed by complications. Those are often reported at specific sites. OBJECTIVES: This case report emphasizes the unusual presentation and site localization of a colonic perforation by a small fish bone, in the context of limited radiological accuracy at the diagnostic phase. CASE PRESENTATION: A 37 year old male was admitted to the gastroenterology ward with upper and left sided abdominal pain associated with fever and marked fatigue. His medical history was marked by a sleeve gastrectomy in 2010 for obesity. Abdominal signs and elevated acute inflammatory syndrome on blood tests were followed by computer tomography which revealed a pericolic mass near the left splenic flexure. The pain and fever increased in intensity, so a laparotomy was proposed. Intraoperatively, a tumor-like lesion was found and a resection with oncologic limits was performed. Microscopic examination of the specimen revealed a fish bone, but only after surgery did the patient confirm that he had eaten fish meal the week before. The post-operative period was uneventful. CONCLUSION: Fish bones remain some of the most frequently ingested alimentary foreign bodies; they may cause atypical clinical presentations, frequently omitted by the patients themselves if symptoms appear delayed. They could also lead to possible high-risk complications which need to be addressed by surgeons.

Contrast-enhanced harmonic versus standard endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in solid pancreatic lesions: a single-center prospective randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasound (CH-EUS) can visualize necrotic areas and vessels inside lesions. CH-EUS findings combined with EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) improves diagnosis in pancreatic solid masses. CH-EUS can also guide EUS-FNA (CH-EUS-FNA), potentially improving the diagnostic rate of EUS-FNA, but such superiority has not been proved in prospective studies. We aimed to assess whether CH-EUS-FNA is superior to standard EUS-FNA for specific diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses and what factors affect the diagnostic rate. METHODS: This randomized controlled study in one tertiary medical academic center included patients with suspected pancreatic solid masses on transabdominal ultrasound or computed tomography (CT) scan. Two passes with a 22-G standard FNA needle were done using EUS-FNA and CH-EUS-FNA in random order, and the visible core obtained was sent for histological analysis. Final diagnosis was based on EUS-FNA or surgical specimen results and on 12-month follow-up by imaging. RESULTS: 148 patients were evaluated. EUS-FNA and CH-EUS-FNA showed diagnostic sensitivities of 85.5 % and 87.6 %, respectively (not significantly different) and the combined sensitivity of the two passes was 93.8 %. The false-negative rate was not significantly different when hypoenhanced or hyperenhanced lesions were compared with the EUS-FNA results. No differences were seen for the results related to location, size, tumor stage, chronic pancreatitis features, or presence of biliary plastic stent. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic rates for samples obtained using 22-G needles with standard EUS-FNA and CH-EUS-FNA were not statistically significantly different.

Rescue Therapy of Delayed Gastric Perforation Caused by an External Drainage Using an Over-the-Scope Clip.

This case reports a iatrogenic gastric fistula due to external draining successfully closed by using an over- the-scope clip. A 50-year old patient with a history of acute pancreatitis, segmental portal hypertension and splenectomy for splenic rupture, with long-term external drainage for a low volume pancreatic fistula, was referred to our hospital. The patient noticed the occurrence of a sudden increase of the drain flow and the immediate drainage of ingested liquid, with no fever or pain. An upper gastrointestinal endoscopy evidenced the gastric fistula with the presence of the drain inside the stomach near a gastric varix. The surgical approach was inappropriate due to bleeding risk. An over-the-scop clip was placed succeeding to stop the gastric flow. The external fistula closed one week later.

Performance of the Standard 22G Needle for Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Tissue Core Biopsy in Pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) are considered good tools for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer and for obtaining material for cytology or histology. The accuracy of EUS-FNA can rise to 85-95%, but it is lower in cases with a chronic pancreatitis background or with previous biliary stenting. We aimed to establish the diagnostic yield of the visible length of the core biopsy samples in pancreatic cancer by using one single type of standard 22G needle and to evaluate the factors which can influence the results. METHOD: EUS-FNA was performed by using a 22G standard needle on patients prospectively recruited with the suspicion of pancreatic masses on transabdominal ultrasound or CT scan over a period of eight months. The number of passes was limited by the length of the core obtained. The final diagnosis was based on EUS-FNA or hepatic biopsy for their metastasis or by follow up every three month by imaging methods. RESULTS: The study included 118 patients. Previous stents were present in 10 patients and chronic pancreatitis features were found in 3 patients. The procedure sensitivity was 89% and the global accuracy was 89%. The presence of biliary stents did not impede the accuracy of results. The number of passes did not influence the results. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic rate of core biopsy by using 22G needles had a high accuracy and it is safe when the length of core dictates the number of passes. The presence of biliary stents did not influence the results.