Rectal ultrasound with fine needle aspiration: an underutilized modality for delineating and diagnosing perirectal, presacral, and pelvic lesions

Abstract

Background and study aims The merits of rectal ultrasound for rectal cancer staging are well documented. Conventional approaches to accessing perirectal and presacral lesions entail computed tomography guidance via a transgluteal approach or frank surgical exploration. We report on the safety and efficacy of performing rectal ultrasound with fine-needle aspiration (RUS-FNA) for evaluating perirectal, presacral, and pelvic abnormalities.

Patients and methods Patients who underwent RUS-FNA of perirectal, presacral, or pelvic lesions between August 2005 and September 2016 were identified using an institutional database. Subjects were all individuals treated at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, United States. Patient demographics and imaging characteristics were noted. Procedural details included lesion size, location, echo appearance, and technical information. Patients were given antibiotics prior to FNA attempt and for 3 days after. Diagnostic yield, clinical utility, and complications were noted.

Results Twenty-seven patients met criteria during the specified study time period. The cohort consisted of 12 males (44.4 %) and 15 females (55.5 %). RUS-FNA was diagnostic in 24 patients (88.8 %) and obviated the need for surgery in 14 patients (51.9 %). There were four complications (14.8 %): two perirectal and two presacral abscesses.

Conclusion While the diagnostic yield of RUS-FNA is high and the potential to affect clinical decision-making is substantial, risk of complication is not negligible. RUS-FNA should only be performed if the result will substantially alter clinical management, and the decision to perform RUS-FNA should be made with close consultation between the endosonographer, surgeon, and/or medical or radiation oncologist.

• References

• 1 Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin 2016; 66: 7-30
• 2 van Gijn W, Marijnen CA, Nagtegaal ID. et al. Preoperative radiotherapy combined with total mesorectal excision for resectable rectal cancer: 12-year follow-up of the multicentre, randomised controlled TME trial. Lancet Oncol 2011; 12: 575-582
• 3 Taylor FG, Quirke P, Heald RJ. et al. Preoperative high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging can identify good prognosis stage I, II, and III rectal cancer best managed by surgery alone: a prospective, multicenter, European study. Ann Surg 2011; 253: 711-719
• 4 Bernstein TE, Endreseth BH, Romundstad P. et al. Circumferential resection margin as a prognostic factor in rectal cancer. Br J Surg 2009; 96: 1348-1357
• 5 Marin G, Suárez J, Vera R. et al. Local recurrence after five years is associated with preoperative chemoradiotherapy treatment in patients diagnosed with stage II and III rectal cancer. Int J Surg 2017; 44: 15-20
• 6 Harewood GC. Assessment of clinical impact of endoscopic ultrasound on rectal cancer. Am J Gastroenterol 2004; 99: 623-627
• 7 Kwok H, Bissett IP, Hill GL. Preoperative staging of rectal cancer. Int J Colorectal Dis 2000; 15: 9-20
• 8 Guinet C, Buy JN, Ghossain MA. et al. Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography in the preoperative staging of rectal cancer. Arch Surg 1990; 125: 385-388
• 9 Rifkin MD, Ehrlich SM, Marks G. Staging of rectal carcinoma: prospective comparison of endorectal US and CT. Radiology 1989; 170: 319-322
• 10 Thaler W, Watzka S, Martin F. et al. Preoperative staging of rectal cancer by endoluminal ultrasound vs. magnetic resonance imaging. Preliminary results of a prospective, comparative study. Dis Colon Rectum 1994; 37: 1189-1193
• 11 Soh JS, Lee HS, Lee S. et al. The clinical usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration and biopsy for rectal and perirectal lesions. Intest Res 2015; 13: 135-144
• 12 Fernández-Esparrach G, Alberghina N, Subtil JC. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration is highly accurate for the diagnosis of perirectal recurrence of colorectal cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 2015; 58: 469-473
• 13 Rzouq F, Brown J, Fan F. et al. The utility of lower endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for the diagnosis of benign and malignant pelvic diseases. J Clin Gastroenterol 2014; 48: 127-130
• 14 Mohamadnejad M, Al-Haddad MA, Sherman S. et al. Utility of EUS-guided biopsy of extramural pelvic masses. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 146-151
• 15 Maleki Z, Erozan Y, Geddes S. et al. Endorectal ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration: a useful diagnostic tool for perirectal and intraluminal lesions. Acta Cytol 2013; 57: 9-18
• 16 Gleeson FC, Larson DW, Dozois EJ. et al. Local recurrence detection following transanal excision facilitated by EUS-FNA. Hepatogastroenterology 2012; 59: 1102-1107
• 17 Hassan GM, Paquin SC, Albadine R. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided FNA of pelvic lesions: A large single-center experience. Cancer Cytopathol 2016; 124: 836-841
• 18 Eloubeidi MA, Tamhane A, Varadarajulu S. et al. Frequency of major complications after EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses: a prospective evaluation. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 63: 622-629
• 19 Adler DG, Jacobson BC, Davila RE. et al. ASGE guideline: complications of EUS. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 61: 8-12
• 20 Levy MJ, Abu Dayyeh BK, Fujii LL. et al. Prospective evaluation of adverse events following lower gastrointestinal tract EUS FNA. Am J Gastroenterol 2014; 109: 676-685
• 21 Levy MJ, Norton ID, Clain JE. et al. Prospective study of bacteremia and complications with EUS FNA of rectal and perirectal lesions. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007; 5: 684-689
• 22 Wiersema MJ, Vilmann P, Giovannini M. et al. Endosonography-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy: diagnostic accuracy and complication assessment. Gastroenterology 1997; 112: 1087-1095
• 23 Lee LS, Saltzman JR, Bounds BC. et al. EUS-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic cysts: a retrospective analysis of complications and their predictors. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2005; 3: 231-236
• 24 Toh JW, Morgan M. Management approach and surgical strategies for retrorectal remours: a systematic review. Colorectal Dis 2016; 18: 337-350
• 25 Patel N, Maturen KE, Kaza RK. et al. Imaging of presacral masses – a multidisciplinary approach. Br J Radiol 2016; 89: 20150698
• 26 Olson MC, Atwell TD, Mynderse LA. et al. CT-guided transgluteal biopsy for systematic sampling of the prostate in patients without rectal access: a 13-year single-center experience. Eur Radiol 2017; 27: 3326-3332
• 27 Goenka AH, Remer EM, Veniero JC. et al. CT-guided transgluteal biopsy for systematic random sampling of the prostate in patients without rectal access. AJR AM J Roentgenol 2015; 205: 578-583
• 28 Gupta S, Madoff DC, Ahrar K. et al. CT-guided needle biopsy of deep pelvic lesions by extraperitoneal approach through iliopsoas muscle. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2003; 26: 534-538
• 29 Gupta S, Nguyen HL, Morello Jr FA. et al. Various approaches for CT-guided percutaneous biopsy of deep pelvic lesions: anatomic and technical considerations. Radiographics 2004; 24: 175-189
• 30 Siddiqui AA, Fayiga Y, Huerta S. The role of endoscopic ultrasound in the evaluation of rectal cancer. Int Semin Surg Oncol 2006; 18: 36