Year 2018 / Volume 110 / Number 9
Original
Analysis of the diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration in patients with a suspected pancreatic malignancy

544-550

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2018.5455/2017

Lei Yang, Tomohisa Iwai, Mitsuhiro Kida, Hiroshi Yamauchi, Kosuke Okuwaki, Hiroshi Imaizumi, Tohru Kaneko, Rikiya Hasegawa, Eiji Miyata, Koizumi Wasaburo,

Abstract
Objectives: to determine the diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for suspected pancreatic malignancy. As well as to identify factors that affect the incidence of false-negative cases and evaluate the value of repeated EUS-FNA in patients with inconclusive results. Methods: we retrospectively evaluated the data of patients who underwent EUS-FNA due to a suspected pancreatic malignancy in our hospital from January 2015 to December 2016. Results: a total of 194 EUS-FNA procedures performed and 175 cases were analyzed. The overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy were 83.4% (151/181), 100% (13/13), 100% (151/151), 30.2% (13/43), and 84.5% (164/194), respectively. The combination of cytological and histological examination significantly increased the diagnostic performance compared to either method alone. The diagnostic sensitivity in metastatic tumors was significantly lower than that for adenocarcinoma. EUS-FNA performed using standard needles combined with the “slow-pull” technique had a lower sensitivity than other methods. According to the multivariate analysis, neither the combination of needle type and suction technique nor final diagnosis were independent factors that affected the diagnostic sensitivity. The sensitivity of repeated EUS-FNA was 50.0% (8/16). Definitive results after a repeated puncture were more likely for pancreatic body and tail masses, heterogeneous lesions and poorly demarcated lesions. However, the difference was not significant. Conclusions: EUS-FNA was accurate for the evaluation of a suspected pancreatic malignancy. Metastatic tumors and the use of a standard needle in combination with the slow-pull technique may increase the incidence of false-negative results. Repeated EUS-FNA has limited value but should be considered for selected cases where the suspicion of malignancy persists.
Share Button
New comment
Comments
No comments for this article
References
References
[1] Ramesh J, Bang JY, Hebert-Magee S, et al. Randomized Trial Comparing the Flexible 19G and 25G Needles for Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration of Solid Pancreatic Mass Lesions. Pancreas 2015;44:128-33.
[2] Iwashita T, Nakai Y, Samarasena JB, et al. High single-pass diagnostic yield of a new 25-gauge core biopsy needle for EUS-guided FNA biopsy in solid pancreatic lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 2013;77:909-15.
[3] Nakai Y, Isayama H, Chang KJ, et al. Slow pull versus suction in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid masses. Dig Dis Sci 2014;59:1578-85.
[4] Itoi T, Tsuchiya T, Itokawa F, et al. Histological diagnosis by EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy in pancreatic solid masses without on-site cytopathologist: a single-center experience. Dig Endosc 2011;23 (Supl )1:34-8.
[5] Suzuki R, Irisawa A, Bhutani MS, et al. Prospective evaluation of the optimal number of 25-gauge needle passes for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions in the absence of an onsite cytopathologist. Dig Endosc 2012;24:452-6.
[6] Korenblit J, Tholey DM, Tolin J, et al. Effect of the time of day and queue position in the endoscopic schedule on the performance characteristics of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for diagnosing pancreatic malignancies. Endosc Ultrasound 2016;5:78-84.
[7] Mohammad AAH, Hadizadeh M, Padashi M, et al. Comparison of two techniques for endoscopic ultrasonography fine-needle aspiration in solid pancreatic mass. Endosc Ultrasound 2014;3:174-8.
[8] Jeong SH, Yoon HH, Kim EJ, et al. High-resolution endoscopic ultrasound imaging and the number of needle passages are significant factors predicting high yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for pancreatic solid masses without an on-site cytopathologist. Medicine (Baltimore) 2017;96:e5782.
[9] Haba S, Yamao K, Bhatia V, et al. Diagnostic ability and factors affecting accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for pancreatic solid lesions: Japanese large single center experience. J Gastroenterol 2013;48:973-81.
[10] Noda Y, Fujita N, Kobayashi G, et al. Diagnostic efficacy of the cell block method in comparison with smear cytology of tissue samples obtained by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration. J Gastroenterol 2010;45:868-75.
[11] Hébert-Magee S. Basic technique for solid lesions: Cytology, core, or both. Endosc Ultrasound 2014;3:28-34.
[12] Bhatia V, Varadarajulu S. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided tissue acquisition: How to achieve excellence. Dig Endosc 2017.
[13] Rong L, Kida M, Yamauchi H, et al. Factors affecting the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for upper gastrointestinal submucosal or extraluminal solid mass lesions. Dig Endosc 2012;24:358-63.
[14] Siddiqui AA, Brown LJ, Hong SK, et al. Relationship of pancreatic mass size and diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration. Dig Dis Sci 2011;56:3370-5.
[15] Hébert-Magee S, Bae S, Varadarajulu S, et al. The presence of a cytopathologist increases the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration cytology for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis. Cytopathology 2013;24:159-71.
[16] Wani S, Muthusamy VR, Komanduri S. EUS-guided tissue acquisition: an evidence-based approach (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2014;80:939-59.e7.
[17] LeBlanc JK, Ciaccia D, Al-Assi MT, et al. Optimal number of EUS-guided fine needle passes needed to obtain a correct diagnosis. Gastrointest Endosc 2004;59:475-81.
[18] Affolter KE, Schmidt RL, Matynia AP, et al. Needle size has only a limited effect on outcomes in EUS-guided fine needle aspiration: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig Dis Sci 2013;58:1026-34.
[19] Larghi A, Iglesias-Garcia J, Poley JW, et al. Feasibility and yield of a novel 22-gauge histology EUS needle in patients with pancreatic masses: a multicenter prospective cohort study. Surg Endosc 2013;27:3733-8.
[20] Hucl T, Wee E, Anuradha S, et al. Feasibility and efficiency of a new 22G core needle: a prospective comparison study. Endoscopy 2013;45:792-8.
[21] Lee YN, Moon JH, Kim HK, et al. Core biopsy needle versus standard aspiration needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a randomized parallel-group study. Endoscopy 2014;46:1056-62.
[22] Seicean A, Badea R, Moldovan-Pop A, et al. Harmonic Contrast-Enhanced Endoscopic Ultrasonography for the Guidance of Fine-Needle Aspiration in Solid Pancreatic Masses. Ultraschall Med 2017;38:174-82.
[23] Seicean A, Mosteanu O, Seicean R. Maximizing the endosonography: The role of contrast harmonics, elastography and confocal endomicroscopy. World J Gastroenterol 2017;23:25-41.
[24] Sugimoto M, Takagi T, Hikichi T, et al. Conventional versus contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration for diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: A prospective randomized trial. Pancreatology 2015;15:538-41.
[25] Chen S, Lin J, Wang X, et al. EUS-guided FNA cytology of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumour (PanNET): a retrospective study of 132 cases over an 18-year period in a single institution. Cytopathology 2014;25:396-403.
[26] Suzuki R, Lee JH, Krishna SG, et al. Repeat endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for solid pancreatic lesions at a tertiary referral center will alter the initial inconclusive result. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 2013;22:183-7.
[27] Prachayakul V, Sriprayoon T, Asawakul P, et al. Repeated endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) improved diagnostic yield of inconclusive initial cytology for suspected pancreatic cancer and unknown intra-abdominal lymphadenopathy. J Med Assoc Thai 2012;95 (Supl) 2:S68-74.
[28] Téllez-Ávila FI, Martínez-Lozano JA, Rosales-Salinas A, et al. Repeat endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration after a first negative procedure is useful in pancreatic lesions. Endosc Ultrasound 2016;5:258-62.
[29] Tadic M, Kujundzic M, Stoos-Veic T, et al. Role of repeated endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in small solid pancreatic masses with previous indeterminate and negative cytological findings. Dig Dis 2008;26:377-82.
[30] Sun B, Yang X, Ping B, et al. Impact of inconclusive endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration results in the management and outcome of patients with solid pancreatic masses. Dig Endosc 2015;27:130-6.
Related articles

Letter

Calcifying fibrous tumor and pathological analysis

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2023.9739/2023

Letter

Endoscopic observation of a rare duodenal tumor

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2023.9679/2023

Editorial

Recent advances in the diagnosis and management of Wilson’s disease

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2023.9633/2023

Letter

Vaginal lesion as first manifestation of colorectal disease

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2022.9270/2022

Digestive Diseases Image

Metastatic lesion of a choroidal melanoma located in the head of pancreas

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2022.8843/2022

Digestive Diseases Image

An unusual cause of a protuberant lesion of the gastric antrum

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2022.8771/2022

Letter

Sigmoid colon Schwannoma simulating colon cancer

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2022.8684/2022

Digestive Diseases Image

Abdominal cocoon sign: an unusual cause of intestinal obstruction

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2021.8057/2021

Letter

POEMS syndrome: an uncommon cause of peritoneal effusion

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2021.8027/2021

Digestive Diseases Image

Phlebosclerotic colitis: an unusual cause of abdominal pain and hematochezia

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2020.7358/2020

Review

New non-invasive biomarkers for colorectal cancer screening

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2020.7233/2020

Editorial

Reflex testing. A key tool for the elimination of hepatitis C

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2020.7201/2020

Letter

Chilaiditi’s and Ogilvie syndromes

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2020.7036/2020

Letter

Hepatocarcinoma diagnosis. Reflection is required

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2020.6845/2019

Letter to the Editor

Sternal cutaneous metastasis of hilar cholangiocarcinoma

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2017.4979/2017

Letter to the Editor

Sister Mary Joseph’s nodule as initial pancreatic cancer manifestation

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2016.4479/2016

Letter to the Editor

About human taeniasis and Taenia saginata diagnosis by endoscopy

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2016.4297/2016

Citation tools
Yang L, Iwai T, Kida M, Yamauchi H, Okuwaki K, Imaizumi H, et all. Analysis of the diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration in patients with a suspected pancreatic malignancy. 5455/2017


Download to a citation manager

Download the citation for this article by clicking on one of the following citation managers:

Metrics
This article has received 327 visits.
This article has been downloaded 184 times.

Statistics from Dimensions


Statistics from Plum Analytics

Publication history

Received: 07/01/2018

Accepted: 13/03/2018

Online First: 23/07/2018

Published: 31/08/2018

Article revision time: 50 days

Article Online First time: 197 days

Article editing time: 236 days


Share
This article hasn't been rated yet.
Reader rating:
Valora este artículo:




Asociación Española de Ecografía Digestiva Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva
The Spanish Journal of Gastroenterology is the official organ of the Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva, the Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva and the Asociación Española de Ecografía Digestiva
Cookie policy Privacy Policy Legal Notice © Copyright 2023 y Creative Commons. The Spanish Journal of Gastroenterology