Small biopsies for pancreatic lesions: Is there still room for fine needle aspiration?
EUS
FNA
FNB
pancreatic lesion
Journal
Cytopathology : official journal of the British Society for Clinical Cytology
ISSN: 1365-2303
Titre abrégé: Cytopathology
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9010345
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2024
Jan 2024
Historique:
revised:
08
10
2023
received:
06
06
2023
accepted:
13
10
2023
pubmed:
31
10
2023
medline:
31
10
2023
entrez:
31
10
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Pancreatic carcinoma is an aggressive tumour with increasing incidence in both sexes worldwide. Early detection is, therefore, essential for patient management. A recent advancement involves the utilization of larger, thicker gauge needles, which enable the collection of core-type biopsies (FNB). Here, we investigated the role of fine needle aspiration and cytopathology in the diagnostic workflow of pancreatic lesions. A search query was designed to search for articles in the PubMed database comparing FNA and FNB for biopsy of pancreatic lesions, and detailed data were extracted from selected studies. Statistical analyses were performed using the R package meta version 6.2. Twenty-one studies made the final cut for data extraction. Overall, median age was 64.3 years (±6.1; 47.6-71.5), male: female proportion 53.9 (±11.3; 27.6-67.4), lesion size 3.1 cm (±0.5; 1.9-4.2 cm) and percentage of malignant cases 78.3% (±26.8; 2.1-100). FNA and FNB diagnostic yield was 85.8% (±10.3; 70.0-100.0) and 89.2% (±7.7; 70.0-98.6), respectively. Average accuracy was 89.5% (±11.7; 63.0-100.0) for FNA and 90.8% (±7.1; 77.0-100.0) for FNB. Adverse effects rate was 1.0% (±1.3; 0-4.3) for FNA and 2.2% (±4.4; 0-16.1) for FNB. None of the selected variables had a significant statistical difference between both methods. FNA and FNB perform similarly for diagnostic material acquisition in pancreatic lesions. The best outcome comes from the association of both techniques, emphasizing the value of combining cytological and histological morphology for the most accurate analysis.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
70-77Informations de copyright
© 2023 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
McGuigan A, Kelly P, Turkington RC, Jones C, Coleman HG, McCain RS. Pancreatic cancer: a review of clinical diagnosis, epidemiology, treatment and outcomes. World J Gastroenterol. 2018;24(43):4846-4861.
Balsano R, Zanuso V, Pirozzi A, Rimassa L, Bozzarelli S. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and immune checkpoint inhibitors: the gray curtain of immunotherapy and spikes of lights. Curr Oncol. 2023;30(4):3871-3885.
Kurita A, Yasukawa S, Zen Y, et al. Comparison of a 22-gauge Franseen-tip needle with a 20-gauge forward-bevel needle for the diagnosis of type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter study (COMPAS study). Gastrointest Endosc. 2020;91(2):373-381 e372.
Reid MD, Bagci P, Ohike N, et al. Calculation of the Ki67 index in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a comparative analysis of four counting methodologies. Mod Pathol. 2015;28(5):686-694.
Jin M, Roth R, Gayetsky V, Niederberger N, Lehman A, Wakely PE Jr. Grading pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms by Ki-67 staining on cytology cell blocks: manual count and digital image analysis of 58 cases. J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2016;5(5):286-295.
Puli SR, Bechtold ML, Buxbaum JL, Eloubeidi MA. How good is endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in diagnosing the correct etiology for a solid pancreatic mass?: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Pancreas. 2013;42(1):20-26.
Saieg M, Pitman MB. Experience and future perspectives on the use of the Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology Terminology System for Reporting Pancreaticobiliary Cytology. Diagn Cytopathol. 2020;48(5):494-498.
Pitman MB, Centeno BA, Reid MD, et al. The World Health Organization reporting system for pancreaticobiliary cytopathology. Acta Cytol. 2023;67(3):304-320.
Syed A, Babich O, Rao B, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration vs core needle biopsy for solid pancreatic lesions: comparison of diagnostic accuracy and procedural efficiency. Diagn Cytopathol. 2019;47(11):1138-1144.
Chen YI, Chatterjee A, Berger R, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle biopsy alone vs. EUS-guided fine needle aspiration with rapid onsite evaluation in pancreatic lesions: a multicenter randomized trial. Endoscopy. 2022;54(1):4-12.
Balduzzi S, Rucker G, Schwarzer G. How to perform a meta-analysis with R: a practical tutorial. Evid Based Ment Health. 2019;22(4):153-160.
Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002;21(11):1539-1558.
Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327(7414):557-560.
Chen TY, Cao JW, Jin C, et al. Comparison of specimen quality among the standard suction, slow-pull, and wet suction techniques for EUS-FNA: a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial. Endosc Ultrasound. 2022;11(5):393-400.
Du C, Chai N, Linghu E, et al. Diagnostic value of SpyGlass for pancreatic cystic lesions: comparison of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration and EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration combined with SpyGlass. Surg Endosc. 2022;36(2):904-910.
Mizukawa S, Kato H, Matsumoto K, et al. Effectiveness of Menghini-type needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic masses. Dig Dis Sci. 2021;66(9):3171-3178.
Faias S, Cravo M, Pereira da Silva J, Chaves P, Dias PA. Endoscopic ultrasound with fine needle aspiration is useful in pancreatic cysts smaller than 3 cm. BMC Gastroenterol. 2020;20(1):413.
Sweeney J, Soong L, Goyal A. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition of solid mass lesions of the pancreas: a retrospective comparison study of fine-needle aspiration and fine-needle biopsy. Diagn Cytopathol. 2020;48(4):322-329.
Minaga K, Yoshikawa T, Yamashita Y, et al. Comparison of the diagnostic performance of newly designed 21-gauge and standard 22-gauge aspiration needles in patients with solid pancreatic masses. Dig Dis Sci. 2019;64(10):2982-2991.
Jiang H, Guo J, Wang K, et al. 22-gauge biopsy needles have a better histological diagnostic yield in the discrimination of specific pancreatic solid neoplasms. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2019;54(1):101-107.
Ishiwatari H, Sato J, Fujie S, et al. Gross visual inspection by endosonographers during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration. Pancreatology. 2019;19(1):191-195.
Cheng B, Zhang Y, Chen Q, et al. Analysis of fine-needle biopsy vs fine-needle aspiration in diagnosis of pancreatic and abdominal masses: a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;16(8):1314-1321.
Naveed M, Siddiqui AA, Kowalski TE, et al. A multicenter comparative trial of a novel EUS-guided core biopsy needle (SharkCore()) with the 22-gauge needle in patients with solid pancreatic mass lesions. Endosc Ultrasound. 2018;7(1):34-40.
Du C, Chai NL, Linghu EQ, et al. Incidents and adverse events of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for pancreatic cystic lesions. World J Gastroenterol. 2017;23(30):5610-5618.
Wani S, Mullady D, Early DS, et al. The clinical impact of immediate on-site cytopathology evaluation during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic masses: a prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015;110(10):1429-1439.
Varadarajulu S, Bang JY, Holt BA, et al. The 25-gauge EUS-FNA needle: good for on-site but poor for off-site evaluation? Results of a randomized trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;80(6):1056-1063.
Nakatsubo R, Yamamoto K, Itoi T, et al. Histopathological evaluation of needle tract seeding caused by EUS-fine-needle biopsy based on resected specimens from patients with solid pancreatic masses: an analysis of 73 consecutive cases. Endosc Ultrasound. 2021;10(3):207-213.
Young Bang J, Krall K, Jhala N, et al. Comparing needles and methods of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy to optimize specimen quality and diagnostic accuracy for patients with pancreatic masses in a randomized trial. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021;19(4):825-835.e827.
Karsenti D, Palazzo L, Perrot B, et al. 22G acquire vs. 20G Procore needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy of pancreatic masses: a randomized study comparing histologic sample quantity and diagnostic accuracy. Endoscopy. 2020;52(9):747-753.
Park SW, Lee SS, Song TJ, et al. The diagnostic performance of novel torque technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition in solid pancreatic lesions: a prospective randomized controlled trial. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020;35(3):508-515.
Barresi L, Crino SF, Fabbri C, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-through-the-needle biopsy in pancreatic cystic lesions: a multicenter study. Dig Endosc. 2018;30(6):760-770.
Bang JY, Hebert-Magee S, Navaneethan U, Hasan MK, Hawes R, Varadarajulu S. Randomized trial comparing the Franseen and fork-tip needles for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling of solid pancreatic mass lesions. Gastrointest Endosc. 2018;87(6):1432-1438.
Fabbri C, Fuccio L, Fornelli A, et al. 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. Surg Endosc. 2017;31(1):225-230.
Park SW, Chung MJ, Lee SH, et al. Prospective study for comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition using 25- and 22-gauge Core biopsy needles in solid pancreatic masses. PLoS One. 2016;11(5):e0154401.
Nagai T, Ishida K, Machida H, et al. Usefulness of cytological diagnosis in pancreatic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration or biopsy: comparison with histological diagnosis and relationship with puncture route and sample acquisition method. Diagn Cytopathol. 2023;51:467-474.
de Pretis N, Crino SF, Frulloni L. The role of EUS-guided FNA and FNB in autoimmune pancreatitis. Diagnostics (Basel). 2021;11(9):1653.
Facciorusso A, Del Prete V, Antonino M, Buccino VR, Wani S. Diagnostic yield of EUS-guided through-the-needle biopsy in pancreatic cysts: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2020;92(1):1-8.e3.
Eloubeidi MA, Tamhane A, Varadarajulu S, Wilcox CM. Frequency of major complications after EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses: a prospective evaluation. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;63(4):622-629.
Thomas T, Kaye PV, Ragunath K, Aithal G. Efficacy, safety, and predictive factors for a positive yield of EUS-guided Trucut biopsy: a large tertiary referral center experience. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104(3):584-591.
Tarantino I, Fabbri C, Di Mitri R, et al. Complications of endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration on pancreatic cystic lesions: final results from a large prospective multicenter study. Dig Liver Dis. 2014;46(1):41-44.
Sundaram S, Chhanchure U, Patil P, et al. Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) versus macroscopic on-site evaluation (MOSE) for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic lesions: a paired comparative analysis using newer-generation fine needle biopsy needles. Ann Gastroenterol. 2023;36(3):340-346.
Arena M, Eusebi LH, Pellicano R, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound core needle for diagnosing of solid pancreatic lesions: is rapid on-site evaluation really necessary? Minerva Med. 2017;108(6):547-553.
Crino SF, Di Mitri R, Nguyen NQ, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy with or without rapid on-site evaluation for diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial. Gastroenterology. 2021;161(3):899-909.e895.
Adler DG, Witt B, Chadwick B, et al. Pathologic evaluation of a new endoscopic ultrasound needle designed to obtain core tissue samples: a pilot study. Endosc Ultrasound. 2016;5(3):178-183.
Kandel P, Tranesh G, Nassar A, et al. EUS-guided fine needle biopsy sampling using a novel fork-tip needle: a case-control study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;84(6):1034-1039.