Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Endosc Int Open 2019; 07(07): E922-E930
DOI: 10.1055/a-0915-9594
Review
Owner and Copyright © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2019

Endoscopic ultrasonography in pancreatic diseases: advances in tissue acquisition

Ioannis V. Mitselos
1   Department of Gastroenterology, School of Health Sciences, University Hospital of Ioannina, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece
,
Ioannis Karoumpalis
2   Department of Gastroenterology, General National Hospital of Athens “G. Gennimatas”, Athens, Greece
,
Vasileios I. Theopistos
1   Department of Gastroenterology, School of Health Sciences, University Hospital of Ioannina, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece
,
Dimitrios Tzilves
3   Department of Gastroenterology, General Hospital of Thessaloniki “Theageneion”,Thessaloniki, Greece
,
Dimitrios K. Christodoulou
1   Department of Gastroenterology, School of Health Sciences, University Hospital of Ioannina, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

submitted 19 January 2019

accepted after revision 09 April 2019

Publication Date:
11 July 2019 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) improved the diagnostic performance and upgraded the role of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) into an interventional modality, able to guide patient management and treatment.This review aimed to highlight the advances, emerging practices, procedural techniques and technological innovations in EUS tissue acquisition in pancreatic diseases.

Methods A thorough review of the literature was performed using PubMed to identify articles that describe techniques, advances, and practices in EUS tissue acquisition in gastrointestinal diseases.

Conclusion Since the first EUS-FNA procedure, EUS guided-tissue acquisition has been evolving continuously. Development of needles with innovative tip design enabled procurement of larger samples with preserved histological architecture. Moreover, sampling techniques and complementary methods, such as contrast harmonic imaging and EUS-elastography, have been introduced in an effort to improve diagnostic performance and sample adequacy.

 

  • References

  • 1 DiMagno EP, Buxton JL, Regan PT. et al. Ultrasonic endoscope. Lancet 1980; 1: 629-631
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Vilmann P, Jacobsen GK, Henriksen FW. et al. Endoscopic ultrasonography with guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in pancreatic disease. Gastrointest Endosc 1992; 38: 172-173
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Puli SR, Batapati Krishna Reddy J, Bechtold ML. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound: it's accuracy in evaluating mediastinal lymphadenopathy? A meta-analysis and systematic review.. World J Gastroenterol 2008; 14: 3028-3037
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Polkowski M, Larghi A, Weynand B. et al. Learning, techniques, and complications of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling in gastroenterology: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Technical Guideline. Endoscopy 2012; 44: 190-206
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Lancelot R, Gonzalez JP, Le Guenno B. et al. Descriptive epidemiology of Rift Valley fever in small ruminants in Southern Mauritania after the 1988 rainy season. Rev Elev Med Vet Pays Trop 1990; 42: 485-491
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 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: 1026-1034
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Vilmann P, Seicean A, Saftoiu A. Tips to overcome technical challenges in EUS-guided tissue acquisition. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2014; 24: 109-124
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Song TJ, Kim JH, Lee SS. et al. The prospective randomized, controlled trial of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration using 22G and 19G aspiration needles for solid pancreatic or peripancreatic masses. Am J Gastroenterol 2010; 105: 1739-1745
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Varadarajulu S, Bang JY, Hebert-Magee S. Assessment of the technical performance of the flexible 19-gauge EUS-FNA needle. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 76: 336-343
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Facciorusso A, Stasi E, Di Maso M. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic lesions with 22 versus 25 gauge needles: A meta-analysis. United European Gastroenterol J 2017; 5: 846-853
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Xu MM, Jia HY, Yan LL. et al. Comparison of two different size needles in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions: A meta-analysis of prospective controlled trials. Medicine (Baltimore) 2017; 96: e5802
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 12 Madhoun MF, Wani SB, Rastogi A. et al. The diagnostic accuracy of 22-gauge and 25-gauge needles in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: a meta-analysis. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 86-92
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Muniraj T, Aslanian HR. New Developments in endoscopic ultrasound tissue acquisition. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2017; 27: 585-599
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Kopelman Y, Marmor S, Ashkenazi I. et al. Value of EUS-FNA cytological preparations compared with cell block sections in the diagnosis of pancreatic solid tumours. Cytopathology 2011; 22: 174-178
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 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: 1056-1063
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Bang JY, Navaneethan U, Hasan MK. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided specimen collection and evaluation techniques affect diagnostic accuracy. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 16: 1820-1828
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Kamisawa T, Ohara H, Kim MH. et al. Role of endoscopy in the diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis and immunoglobulin G4-related sclerosing cholangitis. Dig Endosc 2014; 26: 627-635
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Eloubeidi MA, Mehra M, Bean SM. EUS-guided 19-gauge trucut needle biopsy for diagnosis of lymphoma missed by EUS-guided FNA. Gastrointest Endosc 2007; 65: 937-939
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Guo J, Sun B, Wang S. et al. Diagnosis of lymphoma by endoscopic ultrasound-assisted transendoscopic direct retroperitoneal lymph node biopsy: A case report (with video). Endosc Ultrasound 2015; 4: 69-72
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Karadsheh Z, Al-Haddad M. Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle tissue acquisition: where we stand in 2013?. World J Gastroenterol 2014; 20: 2176-2185
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Sakamoto H, Kitano M, Komaki T. et al. Prospective comparative study of the EUS guided 25-gauge FNA needle with the 19-gauge Trucut needle and 22-gauge FNA needle in patients with solid pancreatic masses. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009; 24: 384-390
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 da Cunha SantosG. ROSEs (Rapid on-site evaluations) to our patients: The impact on laboratory resources and patient care. Cancer Cytopathol 2013; 121: 537-539
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Knoepp SM, Roh MH. Ancillary techniques on direct-smear aspirate slides: a significant evolution for cytopathology techniques. Cancer Cytopathol 2013; 121: 120-128
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Larghi A, Verna EC, Ricci R. et al. EUS-guided fine-needle tissue acquisition by using a 19-gauge needle in a selected patient population: a prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74: 504-510
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Levy MJ, Jondal ML, Clain J. et al. Preliminary experience with an EUS-guided trucut biopsy needle compared with EUS-guided FNA. Gastrointest Endosc 2003; 57: 101-106
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Larghi A, Verna EC, Stavropoulos SN. et al. EUS-guided trucut needle biopsies in patients with solid pancreatic masses: a prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 59: 185-190
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Levy MJ, Wiersema MJ. EUS-guided Trucut biopsy. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 62: 417-426
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Othman MO, Abdelfatah MM, Padilla O. et al. The cellularity yield of three different 22-gauge endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration needles. Diagn Cytopathol 2017; 45: 426-432
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Lee BS, Cho CM, Jung MK. et al. Comparison of histologic core portions acquired from a core biopsy needle and a conventional needle in solid mass lesions: a prospective randomized trial. Gut Liver 2017; 11: 559-566
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Han JP, Lee TH, Hong SJ. et al. EUS-guided FNA and FNB after on-site cytological evaluation in gastric subepithelial tumors. J Dig Dis 2016; 17: 582-587
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Sterlacci W, Sioulas AD, Veits L. et al. 22-gauge core vs 22-gauge aspiration needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of abdominal masses. World J Gastroenterol 2016; 22: 8820-8830
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Vanbiervliet G, Napoleon B, Saint Paul MC. et al. Core needle versus standard needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy of solid pancreatic masses: a randomized crossover study. Endoscopy 2014; 46: 1063-1070
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Kim GH, Cho YK, Kim EY. et al. Comparison of 22-gauge aspiration needle with 22-gauge biopsy needle in endoscopic ultrasonography-guided subepithelial tumor sampling. Scand J Gastroenterol 2014; 49: 347-354
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Hucl T, Wee E, Anuradha S. et al. Feasibility and efficiency of a new 22G core needle: a prospective comparison study. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 792-798
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Bang JY, Hebert-Magee S, Trevino J. et al. Randomized trial comparing the 22-gauge aspiration and 22-gauge biopsy needles for EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic mass lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 76: 321-327
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 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: 1056-1062
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Alatawi A, Beuvon F, Grabar S. et al. Comparison of 22G reverse-beveled versus standard needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic lesions. United European Gastroenterol J 2015; 3: 343-352
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Kamata K, Kitano M, Yasukawa S. et al. Histologic diagnosis of pancreatic masses using 25-gauge endoscopic ultrasound needles with and without a core trap: a multicenter randomized trial. Endoscopy 2016; 48: 632-638
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Strand DS, Jeffus SK, Sauer BG. et al. EUS-guided 22-gauge fine-needle aspiration versus core biopsy needle in the evaluation of solid pancreatic neoplasms. Diagn Cytopathol 2014; 42: 751-758
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 40 Witt BL, Adler DG, Hilden K. et al. A comparative needle study: EUS-FNA procedures using the HD ProCore() and EchoTip((R)) 22-gauge needle types. Diagn Cytopathol 2013; 41: 1069-1074
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Chong CCN, Teoh AYB, Tang RSY. et al. EUS-FNA using 22G nitinol or ProCore needles without on-site cytopathology. Endosc Ultrasound 2018; 7: 56-60
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Bang JY, Hawes R, Varadarajulu S. A meta-analysis comparing ProCore and standard fine-needle aspiration needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition. Endoscopy 2016; 48: 339-349
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 Antonini F, Delconte G, Fuccio L. et al. EUS-guided tissue sampling with a 20-gauge core biopsy needle for the characterization of gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions: A multicenter study. Endosc Ultrasound 2018; 8: 105-110
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 van Riet PA, Larghi A, Attili F. et al. A multicenter randomized trial comparing a 25-gauge EUS fine-needle aspiration device with a 20-gauge EUS fine-needle biopsy device. Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 89: 329-339
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Bang JY, Hebert-Magee S, Navaneethan U. et al. EUS-guided fine needle biopsy of pancreatic masses can yield true histology: results of a randomised trial. Gut 2018; 67: 2081-2084
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 46 Bang JY, Hebert-Magee S, Navaneethan U. et al. 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: 1432-1438
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 47 El Hajj II, Wu H, Reuss S. et al. Prospective assessment of the performance of a new fine needle biopsy device for EUS-guided sampling of solid lesions. Clin Endosc 2018; 51: 576-583
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 48 Adler DG, Muthusamy VR, Ehrlich DS. et al. A multicenter evaluation of a new EUS core biopsy needle: Experience in 200 patients. Endosc Ultrasound 2019; 8: 99-104
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 49 Bang JY, Varadarajulu S. Reply. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 16: 1362
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 50 Bang JY, Kirtane S, Krall K. et al. In memoriam - fine needle aspiration, Birth - fine needle biopsy:The changing trend in endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition. Dig Endosc 2019; 31: 197-202
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 51 Lee WJ, Uradomo LT, Zhang Y. et al. Comparison of the diagnostic yield of EUS needles for liver biopsy: ex vivo study. Diagn Ther Endosc 2017; 2017: 1497831
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 52 Witt BL, Factor RE, Chadwick BE. et al. Evaluation of the SharkCore® needle for EUS-guided core biopsy of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Endosc Ultrasound 2018; 7: 323-328
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 53 Mukai S, Itoi T, Yamaguchi H. et al. A retrospective histological comparison of EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy using a novel franseen needle and a conventional end-cut type needle. Endosc Ultrasound 2019; 8: 50-57
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 54 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: 34-40
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 55 Larsen MH, Fristrup CW, Detlefsen S. et al. Prospective evaluation of EUS-guided fine needle biopsy in pancreatic mass lesions. Endosc Int Open 2018; 6: E242-E248
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 56 Bhattacharya A, Cruise M, Chahal P. Endoscopic ultrasound guided 22 gauge core needle biopsy for the diagnosis of Autoimmune pancreatitis. Pancreatology 2018; 18: 168-169
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 57 Machicado JD, Thosani N, Wani S. Will abandoning fine-needle aspiration increase diagnostic yield from tissues collected during endoscopic ultrasound?. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 16: 1203-1206
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 58 Koul A, Baxi AC, Shang R. et al. The efficacy of rapid on-site evaluation during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic masses. Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf) 2018; 6: 45-48
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 59 Mohanty SK, Pradhan D, Sharma S. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration: What variables influence diagnostic yield?. Diagn Cytopathol 2018; 46: 293-298
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 60 Tamura T, Yamashita Y, Ueda K. et al. Rapid on-site evaluation by endosonographers during endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration for diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Clin Endosc 2017; 50: 372-378
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 61 Ganc RL, Carbonari AP, Colaiacovo R. et al. Rapid on-site cytopathological examination (ROSE) performed by endosonagraphers and its improvement in the diagnosis of pancreatic solid lesions. Acta Cir Bras 2015; 30: 503-508
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 62 Schmidt RL, Witt BL, Matynia AP. et al. Rapid on-site evaluation increases endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration adequacy for pancreatic lesions. Dig Dis Sci 2013; 58: 872-882
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 63 Iglesias-Garcia J, Dominguez-Munoz JE, Abdulkader I. et al. Influence of on-site cytopathology evaluation on the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of solid pancreatic masses. Am J Gastroenterol 2011; 106: 1705-1710
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 64 Polkowski M, Jenssen C, Kaye P. et al. Technical aspects of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling in gastroenterology: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Technical Guideline – March 2017. Endoscopy 2017; 49: 989-1006
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 65 Hebert-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: 159-171
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 66 Matynia AP, Schmidt RL, Barraza G. et al. Impact of rapid on-site evaluation on the adequacy of endoscopic-ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014; 29: 697-705
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 67 Kong F, Zhu J, Kong X. et al. Rapid on-site evaluation does not improve endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration adequacy in pancreatic masses: a meta-analysis and systematic review. PLoS One 2016; 11: e0163056
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 68 Hewitt MJ, McPhail MJ, Possamai L. et al. EUS-guided FNA for diagnosis of solid pancreatic neoplasms: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 319-331
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 69 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: 1429-1439
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 70 Lee LS, Nieto J, Watson RR. et al. Randomized noninferiority trial comparing diagnostic yield of cytopathologist-guided versus 7 passes for EUS-FNA of pancreatic masses. Dig Endosc 2016; 28: 469-475
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 71 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: 547-553
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 72 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: 225-230
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 73 Lin M, Hair CD, Green LK. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration with on-site cytopathology versus core biopsy: a comparison of both techniques performed at the same endoscopic session. Endosc Int Open 2014; 2: E220-223
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 74 Keswani RN, Krishnan K, Wani S. et al. Addition of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration and on-site cytology to EUS-guided fine needle biopsy increases procedure time but not diagnostic accuracy. Clin Endosc 2014; 47: 242-247
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 75 van Riet PA, Cahen DL, Poley JW. et al. Mapping international practice patterns in EUS-guided tissue sampling: outcome of a global survey. Endosc Int Open 2016; 4: E360-370
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 76 Uehara H, Sueyoshi H, Takada R. et al. Optimal number of needle passes in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for pancreatic lesions. Pancreatology 2015; 15: 392-396
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 77 Erickson RA, Sayage-Rabie L, Beissner RS. Factors predicting the number of EUS-guided fine-needle passes for diagnosis of pancreatic malignancies. Gastrointest Endosc 2000; 51: 184-190
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 78 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: 475-481
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 79 Mohamadnejad M, Mullady D, Early DS. et al. Increasing number of passes beyond 4 does not increase sensitivity of detection of pancreatic malignancy by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2017; 15: 1071-1078 e1072
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 80 Abe Y, Kawakami H, Oba K. et al. Effect of a stylet on a histological specimen in EUS-guided fine-needle tissue acquisition by using 22-gauge needles: a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 82: 837-844 e831
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 81 Wani S, Early D, Kunkel J. et al. Diagnostic yield of malignancy during EUS-guided FNA of solid lesions with and without a stylet: a prospective, single blind, randomized, controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 76: 328-335
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 82 Rastogi A, Wani S, Gupta N. et al. A prospective, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial of EUS-guided FNA with and without a stylet. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74: 58-64
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 83 Lai A, Davis-Yadley A, Lipka S. et al. the use of a stylet in endoscopic ultrasound with fine-needle aspiration: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Gastroenterol 2019; 53: 1-8
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 84 Kim JH, Park SW, Kim MK. et al. Meta-Analysis for Cyto-Pathological Outcomes in Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration With and Without the Stylet. Dig Dis Sci 2016; 61: 2175-2184
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 85 Wani S, Gupta N, Gaddam S. et al. A comparative study of endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration with and without a stylet. Dig Dis Sci 2011; 56: 2409-2414
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 86 Yang MJ, Hwang JC, Yoo BM. et al. A prospective randomized trial of EUS-guided tissue acquisition using a 25-gauge core biopsy needle with and without a stylet. Surg Endosc 2018; 32: 3777-3782
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 87 Cazacu IM, Luzuriaga Chavez AA, Saftoiu A. et al. A quarter century of EUS-FNA: Progress, milestones, and future directions. Endosc Ultrasound 2018; 7: 141-160
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 88 Kudo T, Kawakami H, Hayashi T. et al. High and low negative pressure suction techniques in EUS-guided fine-needle tissue acquisition by using 25-gauge needles: a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 80: 1030-1037 e1031
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 89 Villa NA, Berzosa M, Wallace MB. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration: The wet suction technique. Endosc Ultrasound 2016; 5: 17-20
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 90 Attam R, Arain MA, Bloechl SJ. et al. “Wet suction technique (WEST)”: a novel way to enhance the quality of EUS-FNA aspirate. Results of a prospective, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial using a 22-gauge needle for EUS-FNA of solid lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 1401-1407
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 91 Wallace MB, Kennedy T, Durkalski V. et al. Randomized controlled trial of EUS-guided fine needle aspiration techniques for the detection of malignant lymphadenopathy. Gastrointest Endosc 2001; 54: 441-447
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 92 Lee JK, Choi JH, Lee KH. et al. A prospective, comparative trial to optimize sampling techniques in EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77: 745-751
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 93 Wang R, Wang J, Li Y. et al. Diagnostic accuracies of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration with distinct negative pressure suction techniques in solid lesions: A retrospective study. Oncol Lett 2017; 13: 3709-3716
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 94 Antonini F, Fuccio L, Fabbri C. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic masses with core biopsy needles using wet suction technique. Endoscopic Ultrasound 2017; 6: 73-74
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 95 Berzosa M, Villa N, Bartel MJ. et al. Mo1420 pilot study comparing hybrid vs. wet vs. dry suction techniques for EUS-FNA of solid lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 79: AB430
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 96 Wang Y, Chen Q, Wang J. et al. Comparison of modified wet suction technique and dry suction technique in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for solid lesions: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials 2018; 19: 45
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 97 Saxena P, El Zein M, Stevens T. et al. Stylet slow-pull versus standard suction for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: a multicenter randomized trial. Endoscopy 2018; 50: 497-504
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 98 Chen JY, Ding QY, Lv Y. et al. Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles. World J Gastroenterol 2016; 22: 8790-8797
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 99 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: 1578-1585
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 100 El Haddad R, Barret M, Beuvon F. et al. The slow-pull capillary technique increases the quality of endoscopic ultrasound fine needle biopsy samples in solid pancreatic lesions. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 28: 911-916
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 101 Bang JY, Magee SH, Ramesh J. et al. Randomized trial comparing fanning with standard technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic mass lesions. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 445-450
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 102 Barresi L, Tarantino I, Traina M. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration and biopsy using a 22-gauge needle with side fenestration in pancreatic cystic lesions. Dig Liver Dis 2014; 46: 45-50
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 103 Hong SK, Loren DE, Rogart JN. et al. Targeted cyst wall puncture and aspiration during EUS-FNA increases the diagnostic yield of premalignant and malignant pancreatic cysts. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 775-782
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 104 Rogart JN, Loren DE, Singu BS. et al. Cyst wall puncture and aspiration during EUS-guided fine needle aspiration may increase the diagnostic yield of mucinous cysts of the pancreas. J Clin Gastroenterol 2011; 45: 164-169
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 105 Samarasena JB, Nakai Y, Shinoura S. et al. EUS-guided, through-the-needle forceps biopsy: a novel tissue acquisition technique. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 225-226
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 106 Kovacevic B, Karstensen JG, Havre RF. et al. Initial experience with EUS-guided microbiopsy forceps in diagnosing pancreatic cystic lesions: A multicenter feasibility study (with video). Endosc Ultrasound 2018; 7: 383-388
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 107 Kovacevic B, Klausen P, Hasselby JP. et al. A novel endoscopic ultrasound-guided through-the-needle microbiopsy procedure improves diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesions. Endoscopy 2018; 50: 1105-1111
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 108 Nakai Y, Isayama H, Chang KJ. et al. A pilot study of EUS-guided through-the-needle forceps biopsy (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 84: 158-162
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 109 Basar O, Yuksel O, Yang DJ. et al. Feasibility and safety of microforceps biopsy in the diagnosis of pancreatic cysts. Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 88: 79-86
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 110 Shakhatreh MH, Naini SR, Brijbassie AA. et al. Use of a novel through-the-needle biopsy forceps in endoscopic ultrasound. Endosc Int Open 2016; 4: E439-442
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 111 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: 760-770
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 112 European Study Group on Cystic Tumours of the P. European evidence-based guidelines on pancreatic cystic neoplasms. Gut 2018; 67: 789-804
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 113 Kitano M, Kudo M, Sakamoto H. et al. Preliminary study of contrast-enhanced harmonic endosonography with second-generation contrast agents. J Med Ultrason (2001) 2008; 35: 11-18
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 114 Kitano M, Sakamoto H, Matsui U. et al. A novel perfusion imaging technique of the pancreas: contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2008; 67: 141-150
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 115 Yoo J, Yan LH, Siddiqui AA. Can contrast harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography replace endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration in patients with solid pancreatic lesions? An American perspective.. Endosc Ultrasound 2017; 6: 1-3
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 116 Gong TT, Hu DM, Zhu Q. Contrast-enhanced EUS for differential diagnosis of pancreatic mass lesions: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 76: 301-309
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 117 Kamata K, Takenaka M, Omoto S. et al. Impact of avascular areas, as measured by contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS, on the accuracy of FNA for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 87: 158-163
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 118 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: 538-541
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 119 Hou X, Jin Z, Xu C. et al. Contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: a retrospective study. PLoS One 2015; 10: e0121236
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 120 Kamata K, Kitano M, Omoto S. et al. Contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography for differential diagnosis of pancreatic cysts. Endoscopy 2016; 48: 35-41
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 121 Ryozawa S, Kitoh H, Gondo T. et al. Usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. J Gastroenterol 2005; 40: 907-911
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 122 Iglesias-Garcia J, Lindkvist B, Larino-Noia J. et al. Differential diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses: contrast-enhanced harmonic (CEH-EUS), quantitative-elastography (QE-EUS), or both?. United European Gastroenterol J 2017; 5: 236-246
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 123 Pei Q, Zou X, Zhang X. et al. Diagnostic value of EUS elastography in differentiation of benign and malignant solid pancreatic masses: a meta-analysis. Pancreatology 2012; 12: 402-408
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 124 Hu DM, Gong TT, Zhu Q. Endoscopic ultrasound elastography for differential diagnosis of pancreatic masses: a meta-analysis. Dig Dis Sci 2013; 58: 1125-1131
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 125 Li X, Xu W, Shi J. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound elastography for differentiating between pancreatic adenocarcinoma and inflammatory masses: a meta-analysis. World J Gastroenterol 2013; 19: 6284-6291
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 126 Mei M, Ni J, Liu D. et al. EUS elastography for diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77: 578-589
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 127 Xu W, Shi J, Li X. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound elastography for differentiation of benign and malignant pancreatic masses: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013; 25: 218-224
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 128 Ying L, Lin X, Xie ZL. et al. Clinical utility of endoscopic ultrasound elastography for identification of malignant pancreatic masses: a meta-analysis. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013; 28: 1434-1443
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 129 Zhang B, Zhu F, Li P. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound elastography in the diagnosis of pancreatic masses: A meta-analysis. Pancreatology 2018; 18: 833-840
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 130 Jafri M, Sachdev AH, Khanna L. et al. The role of real time endoscopic ultrasound guided elastography for targeting EUS-FNA of suspicious pancreatic masses: a review of the literature and a single center experience. JOP 2016; 17: 516-524
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 131 Chantarojanasiri T, Hirooka Y, Kawashima H. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound in diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: Elastography or contrast-enhanced harmonic alone versus the combination. Endosc Int Open 2017; 5: E1136-E1143
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 132 Hasan MK, Bang JY, Varadarajulu S. Diagnostic value of priming the endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration needle with heparin to improve specimen quality. Dig Endosc 2014; 26: 491
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 133 Diehl DL, Mok SRS, Khara HS. et al. Heparin priming of EUS-FNA needles does not adversely affect tissue cytology or immunohistochemical staining. Endosc Int Open 2018; 6: E356-E362
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 134 Mok SRS, Diehl DL, Johal AS. et al. A prospective pilot comparison of wet and dry heparinized suction for EUS-guided liver biopsy (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 88: 919-925
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 135 Kasugai H, Yamamoto R, Tatsuta M. et al. Value of heparinized fine-needle aspiration biopsy in liver malignancy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1985; 144: 243-244
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar