Año 2025 / Volumen 117 / Número 8
Original
Diagnostic yield of biliary brush cytology via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a 7-year tertiary center experience

447-454

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2025.11158/2025

Beatriz Gros, Paloma Elma Alañón Martínez, Marina Orti Cuerva, Ana Aparicio-Serrano, Elma Gallego Jiménez, Ana Santos Lucio, María Pleguezuelo Navarro, Antonio Hervás Molina, Francisco Javier Serrano Ruiz,

Resumen
Background: biliary brushing cytology during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) was used to assess the nature of a biliary stricture. Its low sensitivity challenges the exclusion of malignancy through this technique. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic yield of brush cytology in biliary strictures and to identify predictive factors associated with a positive diagnosis of malignancy. Methods: an observational retrospective study was performed in a tertiary center. All adult patients undergoing a biliary brushing during ERPC from 2016 to 2022 were included. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictive factors for positive brush cytology. Results: a total of 5,309 patients underwent ERCP within the evaluated period. Out of these, biliary brushing was performed in 518 patients, including 568 cytology samples; 57.7 % (299) were male, with a median of 74 (64-84) years of age. Within the cohort, 24 % (126) had benign strictures and 76 % (392) had malignancy, of which the most common etiologies were pancreatic cancer 42.5 % (220/518), followed by cholangiocarcinoma 22.6 % (117/518). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 48 %, 98 %, 98 % and 37 %, respectively. Sensitivity was 45 % and 52 % in pancreatic adenocarcinoma and cholangiocarcinoma, respectively. Older age (OR 1.02, 95 % CI: 1.01-1.03, p = 0.01) and higher bilirubin levels (OR 1.05, 95 % CI: 1.03-1.08, p < 0.001) were independent predictors for brush cytology positivity. The post-ERCP complication rate was 9.7 % (45/518). Conclusions: biliary brushing cytology during ERCP is a safe procedure with a low sensitivity and high specificity. Older age and higher bilirubin levels are associated with positive biliary cytology.
Resumen coloquial
Detecting malignancies in biliary strictures is crucial due to their high lethality, as early diagnosis allows for timely treatment. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is often required to perform biliary drainage, and during the same procedure, biliary brush cytology can be performed to collect cells for analysis without increasing the complexity of the technique. However, this method has low sensitivity, meaning it may miss some cancers, despite its high specificity. This study analyzed 518 patients who underwent biliary brush cytology between 2016 and 2022 at a tertiary hospital. The results showed a specificity of 96.9%, meaning a positive cytology result is highly reliable. However, sensitivity was only 48.5%, meaning almost half of the malignancies were not detected. Sensitivity was particularly low for pancreatic cancer (45.5%) and cholangiocarcinoma (53%). Two factors were associated with a higher likelihood of a positive cytology result: older age and higher bilirubin levels, likely due to more advanced disease. Although biliary brush cytology is a safe and cost-effective method, its low sensitivity highlights the need for additional diagnostic strategies, to improve cancer detection when these are available.
Nuevo comentario
Comentarios
No hay comentarios para este artículo.
Bibliografía
1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209-249. doi:10.3322/caac.21660
2. Clements O, Eliahoo J, Kim JU, Taylor-Robinson SD, Khan SA. Risk factors for intrahepatic and extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hepatol. 2020;72(1):95-103.
3. Kleeff J, Korc M, Apte M, et al. Pancreatic cancer. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016;2(1):16022. doi:10.1038/nrdp.2016.22
4. Han S, Tatman P, Mehrotra S, et al. Combination of ERCP-Based Modalities Increases Diagnostic Yield for Biliary Strictures. Dig Dis Sci. 2021;66(4):1276-1284. doi:10.1007/s10620-020-06335-x
5. Nur AM, Salim M, Boerner S, et al. High Diagnostic Yield of Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Brush Cytology for Indeterminate Strictures. J Can Assoc Gastroenterol. 2022;5(5):234-239. doi:10.1093/jcag/gwac011
6. Ding SM, Lu AL, Xu BQ, et al. Accuracy of brush cytology in biliopancreatic strictures: a single-center cohort study. Journal of International Medical Research. 2021;49(2). doi:10.1177/0300060520987771
7. Navaneethan U, Njei B, Lourdusamy V, Konjeti R, Vargo JJ, Parsi MA. Comparative effectiveness of biliary brush cytology and intraductal biopsy for detection of malignant biliary strictures: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81(1):168-176. doi:10.1016/j.gie.2014.09.017
8. De Moura DTH, De Moura EGH, Bernardo WM, et al. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography versus endoscopic ultrasound for tissue diagnosis of malignant biliary stricture: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Ultrasound. 2018;7(1):10-19. doi:10.4103/2303-9027.193597
9. Elmunzer BJ, Maranki JL, Gómez V, et al. ACG Clinical Guideline: Diagnosis and Management of Biliary Strictures. American Journal of Gastroenterology. 2023;118(3):405-426. doi:10.14309/ajg.0000000000002190
10. Rizvi S, Khan SA, Hallemeier CL, Kelley RK, Gores GJ. Cholangiocarcinoma-evolving concepts and therapeutic strategies. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2018;15(2):95-111. doi:10.1038/nrclinonc.2017.157
11. Kobayashi M, Ryozawa S, Araki R, et al. Investigation of Factors Affecting the Sensitivity of Bile Duct Brush Cytology. Internal Medicine. 2019;58(3):329-335. doi:10.2169/internalmedicine.1551-18
12. Parsi MA, Deepinder F, Lopez R, Stevens T, Dodig M, Zuccaro G. Factors Affecting the Yield of Brush Cytology for the Diagnosis of Pancreatic and Biliary Cancers. Pancreas. 2011;40(1):52-54. doi:10.1097/MPA.0b013e3181f3aa96
13. SAS website. https://www.sspa.juntadeandalucia.es/servicioandaluzdesalud/hrs3/index.php?id=guia_hospitalizac_presentacion.
14. Kohli DR, Pannala R, Crowell MD, et al. Interobserver Agreement for Classifying Post-liver Transplant Biliary Strictures in Donation After Circulatory Death Donors. Dig Dis Sci. 2021;66(1):231-237. doi:10.1007/s10620-020-06169-7
15. Park H, Han ES, Park S, et al. Anatomical classification and clinical outcomes of biliary strictures in living donor liver transplantation using right liver grafts. Liver Transplantation. 2023;29(3):307-317. doi:10.1002/lt.26580
16. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. JAMA. 2013;310(20):2191. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.281053
17. Elmunzer BJ, Maranki JL, Gómez V, et al. ACG Clinical Guideline: Diagnosis and Management of Biliary Strictures. American Journal of Gastroenterology. 2023;118(3):405-426. doi:10.14309/ajg.0000000000002190
18. Fujii-Lau LL, Thosani NC, Al-Haddad M, et al. American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on the role of endoscopy in the diagnosis of malignancy in biliary strictures of undetermined etiology: summary and recommendations. Gastrointest Endosc. 2023;98(5):685-693. doi:10.1016/j.gie.2023.06.005
19. Patel T. Cholangiocarcinoma-controversies and challenges. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;8(4):189-200. doi:10.1038/nrgastro.2011.20
20. Gerges C, Beyna T, Tang RSY, et al. Digital single-operator peroral cholangioscopy-guided biopsy sampling versus ERCP-guided brushing for indeterminate biliary strictures: a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2020;91(5):1105-1113. doi:10.1016/j.gie.2019.11.025
21. Buffet C, Fourré C, Altman C, et al. Bile levels of carcino-embryonic antigen in patients with hepatopancreatobiliary disease. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1996;8(2):131-134. doi:10.1097/00042737-199602000-00007
22. Charatcharoenwitthaya P, Enders FB, Halling KC, Lindor KD. Utility of serum tumor markers, imaging, and biliary cytology for detecting cholangiocarcinoma in primary sclerosing cholangitis†. Hepatology. 2008;48(4):1106-1117. doi:10.1002/hep.22441
23. Bishay K, Meng ZW, Khan R, et al. Adverse Events Associated With Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Gastroenterology. Published online November 2024. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2024.10.033
Artículos relacionados

Editorial

Pancreatic cancer screening in high-risk individuals

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2024.10635/2024

Editorial

Different trends in stomach and pancreatic cancer mortality rates

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2024.10504/2024

Carta

Acute cholecystitis treated by direct visualization endoscopy

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2023.9432/2022

Editorial

Menos endoscopistas deberían hacer más CPRE

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2023.9507/2022

Carta

CPRE y situs inversus

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2021.8374/2021

Imagen en Patología Digestiva

Malignización de neoplasia papilar intraductal de la vía biliar

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2021.8193/2021

Imagen en Patología Digestiva

A rare case of acute obstructive suppurative pancreatic ductitis associated with ERCP

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2018.5756/2018

Editorial

Prótesis pancreáticas en la CPRE, ¿en qué punto estamos?

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2018.5670/2018

Carta al Editor

Me, the intruder: revisited and rethought

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2018.5575/2018

Editorial

Hacia la excelencia en la CPRE

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2018.5373/2017

Carta al Editor

Metástasis cutánea esternal de colangiocarcinoma hiliar

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2017.4979/2017

Carta al Editor

Accuracy of ASGE criteria for the prediction of choledocholithiasis

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2017.4511/2016

Caso Clínico

Hematoma hepático tras CPRE: presentación de dos nuevos casos

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2017.4237/2016

Carta al Editor

Lupus como manifestación paraneoplásica de colangiocarcinoma

DOI: 10.17235/reed.2016.4064/2015

Imagen en Patología Digestiva

Successive breaks in biliary stents

Instrucciones para citar
Gros B, Alañón Martínez P, Orti Cuerva M, Aparicio-Serrano A, Gallego Jiménez E, Santos Lucio A, et all. Diagnostic yield of biliary brush cytology via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: a 7-year tertiary center experience . 11158/2025


Descargar en un gestor de citas

Descargue la cita de este artículo haciendo clic en uno de los siguientes gestores de citas:

Métrica
Este artículo ha sido visitado 22 veces.
Este artículo ha sido descargado 0 veces.

Estadísticas de Dimensions


Estadísticas de Plum Analytics

Ficha Técnica

Recibido: 16/02/2025

Aceptado: 24/04/2025

Prepublicado: 12/05/2025

Publicado: 24/07/2025

Tiempo de revisión del artículo: 42 días

Tiempo de prepublicación: 85 días

Tiempo de edición del artículo: 158 días


Compartir
Este artículo aun no tiene valoraciones.
Valoración del lector:
Valora este artículo:




Asociación Española de Ecografía Digestiva Sociedad Española de Endoscopia Digestiva Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva
La REED es el órgano oficial de la Sociedad Española de Patología Digestiva, la SociedadEspañola de Endoscopia Digestiva y la Asociación Española de Ecografía Digestiva
Política de cookies Política de Privacidad Aviso Legal © Copyright 2025 y Creative Commons. Revista Española de Enfermedades Digestivas