Endoscopy 2025; 57(04): 390-418
DOI: 10.1055/a-2524-2596
Technical Review

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue sampling: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Technical and Technology Review

1   Department of Experimental Medicine, Section of Gastroenterology, University of Salento, Lecce, Italy (Ringgold ID: RIN18976)
,
Marianna Arvanitakis
2   Department of Gastroenterology, Digestive Oncology and Hepatopancreatology, HUB Hôpital Erasme, Brussels, Belgium
,
Stefano Francesco Crinò
3   Department of Medicine, Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, The Pancreas Institute, University Hospital of Verona, Verona, Italy
,
Carlo Fabbri
4   Gastroenterology and Digestive Endoscopy Unit, Forlì-Cesena Hospitals, AUSL Romagna, Forlì-Cesena, Italy (Ringgold ID: RIN390233)
,
Adele Fornelli
5   Pathology Unit, Ospedale Maggiore „C.A. Pizzardi“, AUSL Bologna, Bologna, Italy
,
6   Department of Gastroenterology, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom (Ringgold ID: RIN5983)
,
Livia Archibugi
7   Pancreatico-Biliary Endoscopy and Endosonography Division, Pancreas Translational and Clinical Research Center, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
,
Silvia Carrara
8   Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas Pieve Emanuele University, Milan, Italy
9   IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Milan, Italy (Ringgold ID: RIN9268)
,
Jahnvi Dhar
10   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Punjab Institute of Liver and Biliary Sciences, Mohali, India
,
Paraskevas Gkolfakis
11   Department of Gastroenterology, „Konstantopoulio-Patision“ General Hospital of Nea Ionia, Athens, Greece
,
Beate Haugk
12   Department of Cellular Pathology, Newcastle Upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom (Ringgold ID: RIN5983)
,
Julio Iglesias Garcia
13   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Health Research Institute of Santiago de Compostela (IDIS), University Hospital of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago, Spain
,
14   Department of Gastroenterology, Hôpital privé Jean Mermoz, Lyon, France
,
Ioannis S. Papanikolaou
15   Hepatogastroenterology Unit, Second Department of Propaedeutic Internal Medicine, Medical School, National and Kapodastrian University of Athens, Attikon University General Hospital, Athens, Greece
,
Andrada Seicean
16   Department of Gastroenterology, „Iuliu Haţieganu“ University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Cluj-Napoca, Romania (Ringgold ID: RIN37576)
,
17   Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
,
Peter Vilmann
18   Gastroenterology Unit, Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev and Gentofte, Herlev, Denmark
19   Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark (Ringgold ID: RIN4321)
,
20   Division of Gastroenterology, Ulster Hospital, Belfast, Northern Ireland
,
21   Department of Medical Sciences and Surgery, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy (Ringgold ID: RIN9296)
› Institutsangaben

Abstract

This Technical and Technology Review from the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) represents an update of the previous document on the technical aspects of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling in gastroenterology, including the available types of needle, technical aspects of tissue sampling, new devices, and specimen handling and processing. Among the most important new recommendations are:

ESGE recommends end-cutting fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles over reverse-bevel FNB or fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needles for tissue sampling of solid pancreatic lesions; FNA may still have a role when rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) is available.

ESGE recommends EUS-FNB or mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB) equally for tissue sampling of subepithelial lesions ≥20 mm in size. MIAB could represent the first choice for smaller lesions (<20 mm) if proper expertise is available.

ESGE does not recommend the use of antibiotic prophylaxis before EUS-guided tissue sampling of solid masses and EUS-FNA of pancreatic cystic lesions.

Supplementary Material



Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
27. Februar 2025

© 2025. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. All rights reserved..

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 
  • References

  • 1 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
  • 2 Pouw RE, Barret M, Biermann K. et al. Endoscopic tissue sampling – Part 1: Upper gastrointestinal and hepatopancreatobiliary tracts. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. Endoscopy 2021; 53: 1174-1188
  • 3 Badaoui A, Teles de Campos S, Fusaroli P. et al. Curriculum for diagnostic endoscopic ultrasound training in Europe: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Position Statement. Endoscopy 2024; 56: 222-240
  • 4 Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA. et al. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol 2011; 64: 383-394
  • 5 Crino SF, Brandolese A, Vieceli F. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound features associated with malignancy and aggressiveness of nonhypovascular solid pancreatic lesions: results from a prospective observational study. Ultraschall Med 2021; 42: 167-177
  • 6 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
  • 7 Imazu H, Uchiyama Y, Matsunaga K. et al. Contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS with novel ultrasonographic contrast (Sonazoid) in the preoperative T-staging for pancreaticobiliary malignancies. Scand J Gastroenterol 2010; 45: 732-738
  • 8 Esposto G, Massimiani G, Galasso L. et al. Endoscopic contrast-enhanced ultrasound and fine-needle aspiration or biopsy for the diagnosis of pancreatic solid lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16: 1658
  • 9 Facciorusso A, Mohan BP, Crino SF. et al. Contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration versus standard fine-needle aspiration in pancreatic masses: a meta-analysis. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2021; 15: 821-828
  • 10 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
  • 11 Seicean A, Samarghitan A, Bolboaca SD. et al. Contrast-enhanced harmonic versus standard endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in solid pancreatic lesions: a single-center prospective randomized trial. Endoscopy 2020; 52: 1084-1090
  • 12 Cho IR, Jeong SH, Kang H. et al. Comparison of contrast-enhanced versus conventional EUS-guided FNA/fine-needle biopsy in diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: a randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 94: 303-310
  • 13 Kuo YT, Chu YL, Wong WF. et al. Randomized trial of contrast-enhanced harmonic guidance versus fanning technique for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling of solid pancreatic lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 2023; 97: 732-740
  • 14 Rustagi T, Gleeson FC, Chari ST. et al. Safety, diagnostic accuracy, and effects of endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration on detection of extravascular migratory metastases. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 17: 2533-2540 e1
  • 15 Ohtsuka T, Fernandez-Del Castillo C, Furukawa T. et al. International evidence-based Kyoto guidelines for the management of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm of the pancreas. Pancreatology 2024; 24: 255-270
  • 16 Lisotti A, Napoleon B, Facciorusso A. et al. Contrast-enhanced EUS for the characterization of mural nodules within pancreatic cystic neoplasms: systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 94: 881-889 e5
  • 17 Facciorusso A, Martina M, Buccino RV. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions guided by endoscopic ultrasound elastography. Ann Gastroenterol 2018; 31: 513-518
  • 18 Gheorghiu M, Sparchez Z, Rusu I. et al. Direct comparison of elastography endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration and B-mode endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration in diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2022; 19: 1302
  • 19 Kovacevic B, Vilmann P. EUS tissue acquisition: From A to B. Endosc Ultrasound 2020; 9: 225-231
  • 20 Iglesias-Garcia J, Poley JW, Larghi A. et al. Feasibility and yield of a new EUS histology needle: results from a multicenter, pooled, cohort study. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 1189-1196
  • 21 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
  • 22 Facciorusso A, Wani S, Triantafyllou K. et al. Comparative accuracy of needle sizes and designs for EUS tissue sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 90: 893-903 e7
  • 23 Facciorusso A, Del Prete V, Buccino VR. et al. Diagnostic yield of Franseen and Fork-Tip biopsy needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition: a meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open 2019; 7: E1221-E1230
  • 24 James TW, Baron TH. A comprehensive review of endoscopic ultrasound core biopsy needles. Expert Rev Med Devices 2018; 15: 127-135
  • 25 Fabbri C, Fornelli A, Fuccio L. et al. High diagnostic adequacy and accuracy of the new 20G procore needle for EUS-guided tissue acquisition: Results of a large multicentre retrospective study. Endosc Ultrasound 2019; 8: 261-268
  • 26 Han S, Bhullar F, Alaber O. et al. Comparative diagnostic accuracy of EUS needles in solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open 2021; 9: E853-E862
  • 27 Gkolfakis P, Crino SF, Tziatzios G. et al. Comparative diagnostic performance of end-cutting fine-needle biopsy needles for EUS tissue sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2022; 95: 1067-1077 e15
  • 28 Ardengh JC, Brunaldi VO, Brunaldi MO. et al. Is the new procore 20G double forward-bevel needle capable to obtain better histological samples by endoscopic ultrasound for diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions?. Arq Bras Cir Dig 2021; 33: e1554
  • 29 Ashat M, Klair JS, Rooney SL. et al. Randomized controlled trial comparing the Franseen needle with the Fork-tip needle for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 93: 140-150 e2
  • 30 Asokkumar R, Yung Ka C, Loh T. et al. Comparison of tissue and molecular yield between fine-needle biopsy (FNB) and fine-needle aspiration (FNA): a randomized study. Endosc Int Open 2019; 7: E955-E963
  • 31 Bang JY, Hebert-Magee S, Navaneethan U. et al. EUS-guided fine needle biopsy of pancreatic masses can yield true histology. Gut 2018; 67: 2081-2084
  • 32 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
  • 33 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: 825-835 e7
  • 34 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: 4-12
  • 35 Cho E, Park CH, Kim TH. et al. A prospective, randomized, multicenter clinical trial comparing 25-gauge and 20-gauge biopsy needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic lesions. Surg Endosc 2020; 34: 1310-1317
  • 36 Crino SF, Le Grazie M, Manfrin E. et al. Randomized trial comparing fork-tip and side-fenestrated needles for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 92: 648-658 e2
  • 37 Igarashi R, Irisawa A, Bhutani MS. et al. The feasibility and histological diagnostic accuracy of novel Menghini needle (EUS Sonopsy CY) for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy of solid pancreatic masses: a prospective crossover study comparing standard biopsy needles. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2019; 2019: 5810653
  • 38 Kandel P, Nassar A, Gomez V. et al. Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy versus fine-needle aspiration for genomic profiling and DNA yield in pancreatic cancer: a randomized crossover trial. Endoscopy 2021; 53: 376-382
  • 39 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: 747-753
  • 40 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: 3171-3178
  • 41 Oh D, Kong J, Ko SW. et al. A comparison between 25-gauge and 22-gauge Franseen needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of pancreatic and peripancreatic masses: a randomized non-inferiority study. Endoscopy 2021; 53: 1122-1129
  • 42 Oppong KW, Bekkali NLH, Leeds JS. et al. Fork-tip needle biopsy versus fine-needle aspiration in endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a randomized crossover study. Endoscopy 2020; 52: 454-461
  • 43 Tomoda T, Kato H, Fujii Y. et al. Randomized trial comparing the 25G and 22G Franseen needles in endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition from solid pancreatic masses for adequate histological assessment. Dig Endosc 2022; 34: 596-603
  • 44 Mendoza Ladd A, Casner N, Cherukuri SV. et al. Fine needle biopsies of solid pancreatic lesions: tissue acquisition technique and needle design do not impact specimen adequacy. Dig Dis Sci 2022; 67: 4549-4556
  • 45 Mohamadnejad M, Mirzaie V, Sotoudeh M. et al. Comparing per-pass performance of 2 types of needles for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling of pancreatobiliary masses in a randomized trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2023; 98: 371-380
  • 46 Yousri M, Abusinna E, Tahoun N. et al. A comparative study of the diagnostic utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration cytology (EUS-FNA) versus endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) in pancreatic and non-pancreatic lesions. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2022; 23: 2151-2158
  • 47 Barresi L, Tacelli M, Crino SF. et al. Multicentric Italian survey on daily practice for autoimmune pancreatitis: Clinical data, diagnosis, treatment, and evolution toward pancreatic insufficiency. United European Gastroenterol J 2020; 8: 705-715
  • 48 Facciorusso A, Barresi L, Cannizzaro R. et al. Diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition in autoimmune pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open 2021; 9: E66-E75
  • 49 Jung JG, Lee JK, Lee KH. et al. Comparison of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with papillary biopsy and endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic biopsy in the diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis. Pancreatology 2015; 15: 259-264
  • 50 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: 373-381 e2
  • 51 Lee SS, Dongwook O, Cho DH. et al. Su1379. Comparison of 19G versus 22G reverse side-bevel needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic core biopsy of autoimmune pancreatitis. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85: AB357-AB358
  • 52 Tsutsumi K, Ueki T, Noma Y. et al. Utility of a 21-gauge Menghini-type biopsy needle with the rolling method for an endoscopic ultrasound-guided histological diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis: a retrospective study. BMC Gastroenterol 2021; 21: 21
  • 53 Zator ZA Zhu H, Cui M. et al. Mo1343. Small-caliber eus-guided core biopsy needles are a safe and effective means to diagnose autoimmune pancreatitis. Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 87: AB454-AB455
  • 54 Ishikawa T, Kawashima H, Ohno E. et al. Usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy for the diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis using a 22-gauge Franseen needle: a prospective multicenter study. Endoscopy 2020; 52: 978-985
  • 55 Oppong KW, Maheshwari P, Nayar MK. et al. Utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy in the diagnosis of type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis. Endosc Int Open 2020; 8: E1855-E1861
  • 56 Noguchi K, Nakai Y, Mizuno S. et al. Role of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine needle aspiration/biopsy in the diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis. Diagnostics (Basel) 2020; 10: 954
  • 57 Thomsen MM, Larsen MH, Di Caterino T. et al. Accuracy and clinical outcomes of pancreatic EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy in a consecutive series of 852 specimens. Endosc Ultrasound 2022; 11: 306-318
  • 58 Notohara K, Kamisawa T, Kanno A. et al. Efficacy and limitations of the histological diagnosis of type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis with endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy with large tissue amounts. Pancreatology 2020; 20: 834-843
  • 59 Ishikawa T, Yamao K, Mizutani Y. et al. A prospective study on the histological evaluation of type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis using endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy with a 19-gauge Franseen needle. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 2024; 31: 581-590
  • 60 Conti Bellocchi MC, Crino SF, Bernardoni L. et al. Utility of EUS-FNB with end-cutting needles in suspected focal/segmental autoimmune pancreatitis: results from a prospective study. Endoscopy 2023; 55 (Suppl. 02) S24-S25
  • 61 Facciorusso A, Sunny SP, Del Prete V. et al. Comparison between fine-needle biopsy and fine-needle aspiration for EUS-guided sampling of subepithelial lesions: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 91: 14-22 e2
  • 62 Facciorusso A, Crino SF, Fugazza A. et al. Comparative diagnostic yield of different endoscopic techniques for tissue sampling of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions: a network meta-analysis. Endoscopy 2024; 56: 31-40
  • 63 Osoegawa T, Minoda Y, Ihara E. et al. Mucosal incision-assisted biopsy versus endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration with a rapid on-site evaluation for gastric subepithelial lesions: A randomized cross-over study. Dig Endosc 2019; 31: 413-421
  • 64 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
  • 65 Sanaei O, Fernandez-Esparrach G, De La Serna-Higuera C. et al. EUS-guided 22-gauge fine needle biopsy versus single-incision with needle knife for the diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions: a randomized controlled trial. Endosc Int Open 2020; 8: E266-E273
  • 66 Zoundjiekpon V, Falt P, Fojtik P. et al. Endosonography-guided fine-needle aspiration versus "key-hole biopsy" in the diagnostics of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial tumors. A prospective randomized interventional study. Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub 2020; 164: 63-70
  • 67 Wong SJ, Wang HP, Shun CT. et al. Tissue diagnosis necessary for small endoscopic ultrasound-suspected gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors 2 cm or less in size: A prospective study focusing on the endoscopic incisional biopsy. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022; 37: 1588-1595
  • 68 Iwai T, Kida M, Imaizumi H. et al. Randomized crossover trial comparing EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration with EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy for gastric subepithelial tumors. Diagn Cytopathol 2018; 46: 228-233
  • 69 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: 347-54
  • 70 Hedenstrom P, Marschall HU, Nilsson B. et al. High clinical impact and diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided biopsy sampling of subepithelial lesions: a prospective, comparative study. Surg Endosc 2018; 32: 1304-1313
  • 71 Deprez PH, Moons LMG, O'Toole D. et al. Endoscopic management of subepithelial lesions including neuroendocrine neoplasms: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. Endoscopy 2022; 54: 412-429
  • 72 Facciorusso A, Crino SF, Gkolfakis P. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle biopsy vs fine-needle aspiration for lymph nodes tissue acquisition: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastroenterol Rep (Oxf) 2022; 10: goac062
  • 73 Carrara S, Rahal D, Khalaf K. et al. Diagnostic accuracy and safety of EUS-guided end-cutting fine-needle biopsy needles for tissue sampling of abdominal and mediastinal lymphadenopathies: a prospective multicenter series. Gastrointest Endosc 2023; 98: 191-198
  • 74 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
  • 75 Chin YK, Iglesias-Garcia J, de la Iglesia D. et al. Accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition in the evaluation of lymph nodes enlargement in the absence of on-site pathologist. World J Gastroenterol 2017; 23: 5755-5763
  • 76 de Moura DTH, McCarty TR, Jirapinyo P. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration versus fine-needle biopsy for lymph node diagnosis: a large multicenter comparative analysis. Clin Endosc 2020; 53: 600-610
  • 77 Hedenstrom P, Chatzikyriakos V, Shams R. et al. High sensitivity of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy in lymphadenopathy caused by metastatic disease: a prospective comparative study. Clin Endosc 2021; 54: 722-729
  • 78 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
  • 79 Nagula S, Pourmand K, Aslanian H. et al. Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-fine-needle aspiration and endoscopic ultrasound-fine-needle biopsy for solid lesions in a multicenter, randomized trial. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018; 16: 1307-1313 e1
  • 80 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
  • 81 Tanisaka Y, Mizuide M, Fujita A. et al. Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and biopsy device for lymphadenopathy. Gastroenterol Res Pract 2021; 2021: 6640862
  • 82 Facciorusso A, Crino SF, Muscatiello N. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle biopsy versus fine-needle aspiration for tissue sampling of abdominal lymph nodes: a propensity score matched multicenter comparative study. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13: 4298
  • 83 Yang Y, ArunaCheng B. et al. Comparison of fine-needle biopsy (FNB) versus fine-needle aspiration (FNA) combined with flow cytometry in the diagnosis of deep-seated lymphoma. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 13: 2777
  • 84 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
  • 85 Lee JM, Lee HS, Hyun JJ. et al. Slow-pull using a fanning technique is more useful than the standard suction technique in EUS-guided fine needle aspiration in pancreatic masses. Gut Liver 2018; 12: 360-366
  • 86 Yang MJ, Park SW, Lee KJ. et al. EUS-guided tissue acquisition using a novel torque technique is comparable with that of the fanning technique for solid pancreatic lesions: A multicenter randomized trial. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 2023; 30: 693-703
  • 87 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: 508-515
  • 88 Sheng LP, Lin R, Tao X. et al. Actual pressure generated by various suction technique and suctioning liquid weight through endoscopic ultrasound-guided aspiration needles. J Dig Dis 2022; 23: 713-719
  • 89 Facciorusso A, Crino SF, Ramai D. et al. Comparative diagnostic performance of different techniques for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2023; 97: 839-848 e5
  • 90 Giri S, Afzalpurkar S, Angadi S. et al. Comparison of suction techniques for EUS-guided tissue acquisition: Systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Endosc Int Open 2023; 11: E703-E711
  • 91 Ramai D, Singh J, Kani T. et al. Wet- versus dry-suction techniques for EUS-FNA of solid lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Ultrasound 2021; 10: 319-324
  • 92 Nakai Y, Hamada T, Hakuta R. et al. A meta-analysis of slow pull versus suction for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition. Gut Liver 2021; 15: 625-633
  • 93 Capurso G, Archibugi L, Petrone MC. et al. Slow-pull compared to suction technique for EUS-guided sampling of pancreatic solid lesions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Endosc Int Open 2020; 8: E636-E643
  • 94 Crino SF, Conti Bellocchi MC, Di Mitri R. et al. Wet-suction versus slow-pull technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy: a multicenter, randomized, crossover trial. Endoscopy 2023; 55: 225-234
  • 95 Lin MY, Wu CL, Su YY. et al. Tissue quality comparison between heparinized wet suction and dry suction in endoscopic ultrasound-fine needle biopsy of solid pancreatic masses: a randomized crossover study. Gut Liver 2023; 17: 318-327
  • 96 Zhou W, Li SY, Jiang H. et al. Optimal number of needle passes during EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions with 22G ProCore needles and different suction techniques: A randomized controlled trial. Endosc Ultrasound 2021; 10: 62-70
  • 97 Costa-Moreira P, Vilas-Boas F, Martins D. et al. Use of suction during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions with a Franseen-tip needle: a pilot comparative trial. Endosc Int Open 2021; 9: E401-E408
  • 98 Di Mitri R, Mocciaro F, Antonini F. et al. Stylet slow-pull vs. standard suction technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy in pancreatic solid lesions using 20 Gauge Procore needle: A multicenter randomized trial. Dig Liver Dis 2020; 52: 178-184
  • 99 Tong T, Tian L, Deng M. et al. Comparison between modified wet suction and dry suction technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy in pancreatic solid lesions. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2021; 36: 1663-1669
  • 100 Lee KY, Cho HD, Hwangbo Y. et al. Efficacy of 3 fine-needle biopsy techniques for suspected pancreatic malignancies in the absence of an on-site cytopathologist. Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 89: 825-831 e1
  • 101 Delgado-Cortes HM, Jaquez-Quintana JO, Gomez-Macias GS. et al. Comparing fine needle biopsy techniques in solid pancreatic lesions: A prospective randomized study. Pancreatology 2023; 23: 836-842
  • 102 Hu X, Yu F, Cao T. et al. Twenty versus 40 back-and-forth needle movements for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic masses: a prospective, crossover, randomized study. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023; 35: 836-842
  • 103 Paik WH, Choi JH, Park Y. et al. Optimal techniques for EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid masses at facilities without on-site cytopathology: results from two prospective randomised trials. J Clin Med 2021; 10: 4662
  • 104 Kataoka K, Ishikawa T, Ohno E. et al. Randomized trial comparing 15 vs 5 actuations per pass during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy for specimen acquisition of solid pancreatic lesions. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023; 38: 1647-1655
  • 105 Takahashi K, Yasuda I, Hayashi N. et al. EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling of solid pancreatic tumors with 3 versus 12 to-and-fro movements: a multicenter prospective randomized controlled study. Gastrointest Endosc 2023; 97: 1092-1099
  • 106 Lee KH, Kim EY, Cho J. et al. Risk factors associated with adverse events during endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue sampling. PLoS One 2017; 12: e0189347
  • 107 Facciorusso A, Bajwa HS, Menon K. et al. Comparison between 22G aspiration and 22G biopsy needles for EUS-guided sampling of pancreatic lesions: A meta-analysis. Endosc Ultrasound 2020; 9: 167-174
  • 108 van Riet PA, Erler NS, Bruno MJ. et al. Comparison of fine-needle aspiration and fine-needle biopsy devices for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid lesions: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy 2021; 53: 411-423
  • 109 Li Z, Liu W, Xu X. et al. A meta-analysis comparing endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration with endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy. J Clin Gastroenterol 2022; 56: 668-678
  • 110 Yao DW, Qin MZ, Jiang HX. et al. Comparison of EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB for diagnosis of solid pancreatic mass lesions: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. Scand J Gastroenterol 2024; 59: 1-8
  • 111 Hassan GM, Laporte L, Paquin SC. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration versus endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle biopsy for pancreatic cancer diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diagnostics (Basel) 2022; 12: 2951
  • 112 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
  • 113 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: 909-915
  • 114 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
  • 115 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 e2
  • 116 Ge PS, Wani S, Watson RR. et al. Per-pass performance characteristics of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of malignant solid pancreatic masses in a large multicenter cohort. Pancreas 2018; 47: 296-301
  • 117 Mita N, Iwashita T, Uemura S. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy using 22-gauge Franseen needle for the histological diagnosis of solid lesions: a multicenter prospective pilot study. Dig Dis Sci 2020; 65: 1155-1163
  • 118 Inoue T, Tsuzuki T, Takahara T. et al. Prospective evaluation of 25-gauge Franseen needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic masses. Endosc Int Open 2020; 8: E566-E570
  • 119 Teodorescu C, Gheorghiu M, Zaharie T. et al. Endoscopic ultrasonography-fine needle aspiration of solid pancreatic masses: Do we need the fourth pass? A prospective study. Diagn Cytopathol 2021; 49: 395-403
  • 120 Suzuki M, Sekino Y, Hosono K. et al. Optimal number of needle punctures in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy for gastric subepithelial lesions without rapid on-site evaluation. J Med Ultrason (2001) 2021; 48: 623-629
  • 121 Itonaga M, Yasukawa S, Fukutake N. et al. Comparison of 22-gauge standard and Franseen needles in EUS-guided tissue acquisition for diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2022; 96: 57-66 e2
  • 122 Mangiavillano B, Facciorusso A, di Matteo FM. et al. Establishing the optimal number of passes during EUS-FNB for diagnosis of pancreatic solid lesions: Prospective multicenter study. Endosc Int Open 2024; 12: E467-E473
  • 123 Mangiavillano B, Crino SF, Facciorusso A. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy with or without macroscopic on-site evaluation: a randomized controlled noninferiority trial. Endoscopy 2023; 55: 129-137
  • 124 Chalhoub JM, Hawa F, Grantham T. et al. Effect of the number of passes on diagnostic performance of EUS-fine needle biopsy of solid pancreatic masses: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2024; 100: 595-604.e8
  • 125 Bang JY, Jhala N, Seth A. et al. Standardisation of EUS-guided FNB technique for molecular profiling in pancreatic cancer: results of a randomised trial. Gut 2023; 72: 1255-1257
  • 126 Aslanian HR, Estrada JD, Rossi F. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for obstructing pancreas head masses: combined or separate procedures?. J Clin Gastroenterol 2011; 45: 711-713
  • 127 Siddiqui AA, Fein M, Kowalski TE. et al. Comparison of the influence of plastic and fully covered metal biliary stents on the accuracy of EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Dig Dis Sci 2012; 57: 2438-2445
  • 128 Bekkali NLH, Nayar MK, Leeds JS. et al. Impact of metal and plastic stents on endoscopic ultrasound-guided aspiration cytology and core histology of head of pancreas masses. Endoscopy 2019; 51: 1044-1050
  • 129 Crino SF, Conti Bellocchi MC, Antonini F. et al. Impact of biliary stents on the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic head lesions: A multicenter study. Endosc Ultrasound 2021; 10: 440-447
  • 130 Ranney N, Phadnis M, Trevino J. et al. Impact of biliary stents on EUS-guided FNA of pancreatic mass lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 76: 76-83
  • 131 Kim JJ, Walia S, Lee SH. et al. Lower yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in patients with pancreatic head mass with a biliary stent. Dig Dis Sci 2015; 60: 543-549
  • 132 Antonini F, Fuccio L, Giorgini S. et al. Biliary plastic stent does not influence the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of pancreatic head masses performed with core biopsy needles. Dig Liver Dis 2017; 49: 898-902
  • 133 Fisher JM, Gordon SR, Gardner TB. The impact of prior biliary stenting on the accuracy and complication rate of endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration for diagnosing pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Pancreas 2011; 40: 21-24
  • 134 Constantinescu A, Plotogea OM, Stan-Ilie M. et al. Impact of biliary stenting in endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition among patients with pancreatic cancer. J Clin Ultrasound 2022; 50: 844-849
  • 135 Facciorusso A, Chandan S, Gkolfakis P. et al. Do biliary stents affect EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) in solid pancreatic lesions determining biliary obstruction? a literature review with meta-analysis. Cancers (Basel) 2023; 15: 1789
  • 136 Wyse J, Rubino M, Iglesias Garcia J. et al. Onsite evaluation of endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration: the endosonographer, the cytotechnologist and the cytopathologist. Rev Esp Enferm Dig 2017; 109: 279-283
  • 137 Savoy AD, Raimondo M, Woodward TA. et al. Can endosonographers evaluate on-site cytologic adequacy? A comparison with cytotechnologists. Gastrointest Endosc 2007; 65: 953-957
  • 138 Nebel JA, Soldan M, Dumonceau JM. et al. Rapid on-site evaluation by endosonographer of endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: a randomized controlled trial. Pancreas 2021; 50: 815-821
  • 139 Zhang S, Ni M, Wang P. et al. Diagnostic value of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration with rapid on-site evaluation performed by endoscopists in solid pancreatic lesions: A prospective, randomized controlled trial. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022; 37: 1975-1982
  • 140 Eloubeidi MA, Tamhane A, Jhala N. et al. Agreement between rapid onsite and final cytologic interpretations of EUS-guided FNA specimens: implications for the endosonographer and patient management. Am J Gastroenterol 2006; 101: 2841-2847
  • 141 Lin R, Sheng LP, Han CQ. et al. Application of artificial intelligence to digital-rapid on-site cytopathology evaluation during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration: A proof-of-concept study. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2023; 38: 883-887
  • 142 Wani S MV, Komanduri S, Watson RR. et al. 1040. Fine needle biopsy (FNB) is more cost-effective than fine needle aspiration (FNA) for endoscopic ultrasound guided tissue sampling: an economic analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 79: AB189
  • 143 Khoury T, Sbeit W. Cost-effectiveness of rapid on-site evaluation of endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration in gastrointestinal lesions. Cytopathology 2021; 32: 326-330
  • 144 Sbeit W, Khoury T. Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle biopsy was not more cost-effective than fine-needle aspiration with rapid on-site evaluation in gastrointestinal lesions diagnosis. Diagn Cytopathol 2021; 49: 944-947
  • 145 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
  • 146 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
  • 147 Kappelle WFW, van Leerdam ME, Schwartz MP. et al. Rapid on-site evaluation during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of lymph nodes does not increase diagnostic yield: A randomized, multicenter trial. Am J Gastroenterol 2018; 113: 677-685
  • 148 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-E370
  • 149 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: 899-909 e5
  • 150 Facciorusso A, Gkolfakis P, Tziatzios G. et al. Comparison between EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy with or without rapid on-site evaluation for tissue sampling of solid pancreatic lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Ultrasound 2022; 11: 458-465
  • 151 Khurana KK, Graber B, Wang D. et al. Telecytopathology for on-site adequacy evaluation decreases the nondiagnostic rate in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic lesions. Telemed J E Health 2014; 20: 822-827
  • 152 Machado RS, Richa R, Callegari F. et al. Instant messenger smartphone application for endosonographer/cytopathologist real-time interaction at a distance in EUS-FNA for solid pancreatic lesions. Endosc Int Open 2019; 7: E1027-E1030
  • 153 de Moura DTH, McCarty TR, Jirapinyo P. et al. Evaluation of endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration versus fine-needle biopsy and impact of rapid on-site evaluation for pancreatic masses. Endosc Int Open 2020; 8: E738-E747
  • 154 Fitzpatrick MJ, Hernandez-Barco YG, Krishnan K. et al. Evaluating triage protocols for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsies of the pancreas. J Am Soc Cytopathol 2020; 9: 396-404
  • 155 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
  • 156 Gines A, Fusaroli P, Sendino O. et al. Performance of a new flexible 19 G EUS needle in pancreatic solid lesions located in the head and uncinate process: A prospective multicenter study. Endosc Int Open 2021; 9: E1269-E1275
  • 157 Soto-Solis R, Paz MP, Torres-Ruiz MI. et al. Rapid on-site cytologic evaluation during endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsies of pancreatic solid lesions. Cir Cir 2020; 88: 435-440
  • 158 Mahmood SK, Abdelfattah A, Joyce AM. et al. SU1356. Sharkcore pancreatic biopsies with rose (rapid on-site evaluation) have a higher diagnostic yield than Sharkcore biopsies without rose. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 86: AB348-AB349
  • 159 Iwashita T, Yasuda I, Mukai T. et al. Macroscopic on-site quality evaluation of biopsy specimens to improve the diagnostic accuracy during EUS-guided FNA using a 19-gauge needle for solid lesions: a single-center prospective pilot study (MOSE study). Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 177-185
  • 160 Chong CCN, Lakhtakia S, Nguyen N. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition with or without macroscopic on-site evaluation: randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy 2020; 52: 856-863
  • 161 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: 340-346
  • 162 Stigliano S, Balassone V, Biasutto D. et al. Accuracy of visual on-site evaluation (Vose) In predicting the adequacy of Eus-guided fine needle biopsy: A single center prospective study. Pancreatology 2021; 21: 312-317
  • 163 Mohan BP, Madhu D, Reddy N. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling by macroscopic on-site evaluation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2022; 96: 909-917 e11
  • 164 Stigliano S, Crescenzi A, Taffon C. et al. Role of fluorescence confocal microscopy for rapid evaluation of EUS fine-needle biopsy sampling in pancreatic solid lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 94: 562-568 e1
  • 165 Amendoeira I, Arcidiacono PG, Barizzi J. et al. New digital confocal laser microscopy may boost real-time evaluation of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) from solid pancreatic lesions: Data from an international multicenter study. EBioMedicine 2022; 86: 104377
  • 166 Salvia R, Burelli A, Nepi A. et al. Pancreatic cystic neoplasms: Still high rates of preoperative misdiagnosis in the guidelines and endoscopic ultrasound era. Surgery 2023; 174: 1410-1415
  • 167 Zhu H, Jiang F, Zhu J. et al. Assessment of morbidity and mortality associated with endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for pancreatic cystic lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig Endosc 2017; 29: 667-675
  • 168 Leung KK, Ross WA, Evans D. et al. Pancreatic cystic neoplasm: the role of cyst morphology, cyst fluid analysis, and expectant management. Ann Surg Oncol 2009; 16: 2818-2824
  • 169 Bick BL, Enders FT, Levy MJ. et al. The string sign for diagnosis of mucinous pancreatic cysts. Endoscopy 2015; 47: 626-631
  • 170 Brugge WR, Lewandrowski K, Lee-Lewandrowski E. et al. Diagnosis of pancreatic cystic neoplasms: a report of the cooperative pancreatic cyst study. Gastroenterology 2004; 126: 1330-1336
  • 171 Kwan MC, Pitman MB, Fernandez-Del Castillo C. et al. Revisiting the performance of cyst fluid carcinoembryonic antigen as a diagnostic marker for pancreatic mucinous cysts: a comprehensive 20-year institutional review. Gut 2024; 73: 629-638
  • 172 Oppong KW, Dawwas MF, Charnley RM. et al. EUS and EUS-FNA diagnosis of suspected pancreatic cystic neoplasms: Is the sum of the parts greater than the CEA?. Pancreatology 2015; 15: 531-537
  • 173 van der Waaij LA, van Dullemen HM, Porte RJ. Cyst fluid analysis in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesions: a pooled analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2005; 62: 383-389
  • 174 Zikos T, Pham K, Bowen R. et al. Cyst fluid glucose is rapidly feasible and accurate in diagnosing mucinous pancreatic cysts. Am J Gastroenterol 2015; 110: 909-914
  • 175 Mohan BP, Madhu D, Khan SR. et al. Intracystic glucose levels in differentiating mucinous from nonmucinous pancreatic cysts: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Gastroenterol 2022; 56: e131-e136
  • 176 Gorris M, Dijk F, Farina A. et al. Validation of combined carcinoembryonic antigen and glucose testing in pancreatic cyst fluid to differentiate mucinous from non-mucinous cysts. Surg Endosc 2023; 37: 3739-3746
  • 177 McCarty TR, Garg R, Rustagi T. Pancreatic cyst fluid glucose in differentiating mucinous from nonmucinous pancreatic cysts: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 94: 698-712 e6
  • 178 Rossi G, Petrone MC, Tacelli M. et al. Glucose and lactate levels are lower in EUS-aspirated cyst fluid of mucinous vs non-mucinous pancreatic cystic lesions. Dig Liver Dis 2024; 56: 836-840
  • 179 Thosani N, Thosani S, Qiao W. et al. Role of EUS-FNA-based cytology in the diagnosis of mucinous pancreatic cystic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig Dis Sci 2010; 55: 2756-66
  • 180 Nikiforova MN, Khalid A, Fasanella KE. et al. Integration of KRAS testing in the diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesions: a clinical experience of 618 pancreatic cysts. Mod Pathol 2013; 26: 1478-1487
  • 181 Pan S, Brand RE, Lai LA. et al. Proteome heterogeneity and malignancy detection in pancreatic cyst fluids. Clin Transl Med 2021; 11: e506
  • 182 Pfluger MJ, Jamouss KT, Afghani E. et al. Predictive ability of pancreatic cyst fluid biomarkers: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Pancreatology 2023; 23: 868-877
  • 183 Khan I, Baig M, Bandepalle T. et al. Utility of cyst fluid carcinoembryonic antigen in differentiating mucinous and non-mucinous pancreatic cysts: an updated meta-analysis. Dig Dis Sci 2022; 67: 4541-4548
  • 184 Guzman-Calderon E, Md BM, Casellas JA. et al. Intracystic glucose levels appear useful for diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig Dis Sci 2022; 67: 2562-2570
  • 185 Faias S, Cravo M, Chaves P. et al. Comparative analysis of glucose and carcinoembryonic antigen in the diagnosis of pancreatic mucinous cysts: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 94: 235-247
  • 186 McCarty TR, Paleti S, Rustagi T. Molecular analysis of EUS-acquired pancreatic cyst fluid for KRAS and GNAS mutations for diagnosis of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia and mucinous cystic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2021; 93: 1019-1033 e5
  • 187 Crino SF, Bernardoni L, Gabbrielli A. et al. Beyond pancreatic cyst epithelium: evidence of ovarian-like stroma in EUS-guided through-the-needle micro-forceps biopsy specimens. Am J Gastroenterol 2018; 113: 1059-1060
  • 188 Kovacevic B, Klausen P, Rift CV. et al. Clinical impact of endoscopic ultrasound-guided through-the-needle microbiopsy in patients with pancreatic cysts. Endoscopy 2021; 53: 44-52
  • 189 Astbury S, Baskar A, Grove JI. et al. Next-generation sequencing of pancreatic cyst wall specimens obtained using micro-forceps for improving diagnostic accuracy. Endosc Int Open 2023; 11: E983-E991
  • 190 Rift CV, Melchior LC, Kovacevic B. et al. Targeted next-generation sequencing of EUS-guided through-the-needle-biopsy sampling from pancreatic cystic lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 2023; 97: 50-58 e4
  • 191 Yang D, Trindade AJ, Yachimski P. et al. Histologic analysis of endoscopic ultrasound-guided through the needle microforceps biopsies accurately identifies mucinous pancreas cysts. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2019; 17: 1587-1596
  • 192 Larghi A, Manfrin E, Fabbri C. et al. Interobserver agreement among expert pathologists on through-the-needle microforceps biopsy samples for evaluation of pancreatic cystic lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 90: 784-792 e4
  • 193 Facciorusso A, Ramai D, Gkolfakis P. et al. Through-the-needle biopsy of pancreatic cystic lesions: current evidence and implications for clinical practice. Expert Rev Med Devices 2021; 18: 1165-1174
  • 194 Kovacevic B, Kalaitzakis E, Klausen P. et al. EUS-guided through-the-needle microbiopsy of pancreatic cysts: Technical aspects (with video). Endosc Ultrasound 2020; 9: 220-224
  • 195 Crino SF, Bernardoni L, Brozzi L. et al. Association between macroscopically visible tissue samples and diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided through-the-needle microforceps biopsy sampling of pancreatic cystic lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 90: 933-943
  • 196 Crino SF, Ammendola S, Gabbrielli A. et al. Time to standardize through-the-needle biopsy specimen handling. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 92: 981-983
  • 197 Tacelli M, Bina N, Crino SF. et al. Reliability of grading preoperative pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors on EUS specimens: a systematic review with meta-analysis of aggregate and individual data. Gastrointest Endosc 2022; 96: 898-908 e23
  • 198 Melita G, Pallio S, Tortora A. et al. Diagnostic and interventional role of endoscopic ultrasonography for the management of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms. J Clin Med 2021; 10: 2638
  • 199 Conti Bellocchi MC, Manfrin E, Brillo A. et al. Rare pancreatic/peripancreatic cystic lesions can be accurately characterized by EUS with through-the-needle biopsy - a unique pictorial essay with clinical and histopathological correlations. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 13: 3663
  • 200 Crino SF, Bernardoni L, Manfrin E. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound features of pancreatic schwannoma. Endosc Ultrasound 2016; 5: 396-398
  • 201 Crino SF. Through-the-needle microforceps biopsy: a powerful tool but for selected patients. Endoscopy 2021; 53: 53-54
  • 202 McCarty T, Rustagi T. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided through-the-needle microforceps biopsy improves diagnostic yield for pancreatic cystic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open 2020; 8: E1280-E1290
  • 203 Facciorusso A, Del Prete V, Antonino M. et al. Diagnostic yield of EUS-guided through-the-needle biopsy in pancreatic cysts: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2020; 92: 1-8 e3
  • 204 Tacelli M, Celsa C, Magro B. et al. Diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasound through-the-needle microforceps biopsy of pancreatic cystic lesions: Systematic review with meta-analysis. Dig Endosc 2020; 32: 1018-1030
  • 205 Westerveld DR, Ponniah SA, Draganov PV. et al. Diagnostic yield of EUS-guided through-the-needle microforceps biopsy versus EUS-FNA of pancreatic cystic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open 2020; 8: E656-E667
  • 206 Kovacevic B, Antonelli G, Klausen P. et al. EUS-guided biopsy versus confocal laser endomicroscopy in patients with pancreatic cystic lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Ultrasound 2021; 10: 270-279
  • 207 Gopakumar H, Puli SR. Value of Endoscopic ultrasound-guided through-the-needle biopsy in pancreatic cystic lesions. a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gastrointest Cancer 2024; 55: 15-25
  • 208 Facciorusso A, Arevalo-Mora M, Conti Bellocchi MC. et al. Impact of antibiotic prophylaxis on infection rate after endoscopic ultrasound through-the-needle biopsy of pancreatic cysts: a propensity score-matched study. Diagnostics (Basel) 2022; 12: 211
  • 209 Facciorusso A, Kovacevic B, Yang D. et al. Predictors of adverse events after endoscopic ultrasound-guided through-the-needle biopsy of pancreatic cysts: a recursive partitioning analysis. Endoscopy 2022; 54: 1158-1168
  • 210 Rift CV, Scheie D, Toxvaerd A. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided through-the-needle-biopsies and simultaneously obtained fine needle aspiration for cytology from pancreatic cysts: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Pathol Res Pract 2021; 220: 153368
  • 211 Li SY, Wang ZJ, Pan CY. et al. Comparative performance of endoscopic ultrasound-based techniques in patients with pancreatic cystic lesions: a network meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol 2023; 118: 243-255
  • 212 Napoleon B, Krishna SG, Marco B. et al. Confocal endomicroscopy for evaluation of pancreatic cystic lesions: a systematic review and international Delphi consensus report. Endosc Int Open 2020; 8: E1566-E1581
  • 213 Karia K, Waxman I, Konda VJ. et al. Needle-based confocal endomicroscopy for pancreatic cysts: the current agreement in interpretation. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 83: 924-927
  • 214 Napoleon B, Lemaistre AI, Pujol B. et al. In vivo characterization of pancreatic cystic lesions by needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (nCLE): proposition of a comprehensive nCLE classification confirmed by an external retrospective evaluation. Surg Endosc 2016; 30: 2603-2612
  • 215 Krishna SG, Brugge WR, Dewitt JM. et al. Needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy for the diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesions: an international external interobserver and intraobserver study (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 86: 644-654 e2
  • 216 Krishna SG, Lee JH. Appraisal of needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy in the diagnosis of pancreatic cysts. World J Gastroenterol 2016; 22: 1701-1710
  • 217 Nakai Y, Iwashita T, Park DH. et al. Diagnosis of pancreatic cysts: EUS-guided, through-the-needle confocal laser-induced endomicroscopy and cystoscopy trial: DETECT study. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 1204-1214
  • 218 Le Pen C, Palazzo L, Napoleon B. A health economic evaluation of needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy for the diagnosis of pancreatic cysts. Endosc Int Open 2017; 5: E987-E995
  • 219 Facciorusso A, Buccino VR, Sacco R. Needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy in pancreatic cysts: a meta-analysis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 32: 1084-1090
  • 220 Konjeti VR, McCarty TR, Rustagi T. Needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (nCLE) for evaluation of pancreatic cystic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Gastroenterol 2022; 56: 72-80
  • 221 Saghir SM, Dhindsa BS, Daid SGS. et al. Efficacy of EUS-guided needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy in the diagnosis of pancreatic lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Ultrasound 2022; 11: 275-282
  • 222 Wang X, Hu J, Yang F. et al. Needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy for diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesions: a meta-analysis. Minim Invasive Ther Allied Technol 2022; 31: 653-663
  • 223 Khashab MA, Chithadi KV. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee. et al. Antibiotic prophylaxis for GI endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 81-89
  • 224 Colan-Hernandez J, Sendino O, Loras C. et al. Antibiotic prophylaxis is not required for endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic cystic lesions, based on a randomized trial. Gastroenterology 2020; 158: 1642-1649 e1
  • 225 Facciorusso A, Mohan BP, Tacelli M. et al. Use of antibiotic prophylaxis is not needed for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic cysts: a meta-analysis. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020; 14: 999-1005
  • 226 Palomera-Tejeda E, Shah H, Attar BM. et al. Prophylactic antibiotics do not prevent infectious complications of endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic cysts: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Pancreas 2021; 50: 667-672
  • 227 Guarner-Argente C, Shah P, Buchner A. et al. Use of antimicrobials for EUS-guided FNA of pancreatic cysts: a retrospective, comparative analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74: 81-86
  • 228 Facciorusso A, Buccino VR, Turco A. et al. Antibiotics do not decrease the rate of infection after endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic cysts. Dig Dis Sci 2019; 64: 2308-2315
  • 229 Badrinath M, Kanagalingam G, Iorio N. et al. 113. Are antibiotics necessary for EUS-FNA of pancreatic cysts: a retrospective study. Am J Gastroenterol 2019; 114: S69
  • 230 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
  • 231 Torous VF, Cuda JM, Manucha V. et al. Cell blocks in cytology: review of preparation methods, advantages, and limitations. J Am Soc Cytopathol 2023; 12: 77-88
  • 232 Takahashi K, Yasuda I, Hanaoka T. et al. Comparison of histological sample volumes among various endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy needles. J Clin Med 2021; 10: 3560
  • 233 Crino SF, Larghi A, Bernardoni L. et al. Touch imprint cytology on endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle biopsy provides comparable sample quality and diagnostic yield to standard endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration specimens in the evaluation of solid pancreatic lesions. Cytopathology 2019; 30: 179-186
  • 234 Yoon WJ, Bishop Pitman M. Cytology specimen management, triage and standardized reporting of fine needle aspiration biopsies of the pancreas. J Pathol Transl Med 2015; 49: 364-372
  • 235 Wong N. My approach to endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy specimens of the pancreas. J Clin Pathol 2020; 73: 297-309
  • 236 Ieni A, Todaro P, Crino SF. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology in pancreaticobiliary carcinomas: diagnostic efficacy of cell-block immunocytochemistry. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 2015; 14: 305-312
  • 237 Pan HH, Zhou XX, Zhao F. et al. Diagnostic value of liquid-based cytology and smear cytology in pancreatic endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration: A meta-analysis. World J Clin Cases 2020; 8: 3006-3020
  • 238 Burger M, Heidrich A, Petersen I. et al. Increased accuracy of FNA-based cytological diagnosis of pancreatic lesions by use of an ethanol-based fixative system: A STROBE compliant study. Medicine (Baltimore) 2022; 101: e30449
  • 239 Huang J, Liang Y, Xu L. et al. Diagnostic efficacy of different pathologic methods for assessing tissue obtained by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration: a prospective study. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2021; 14: 34-44
  • 240 Alvarez-Nava Torrego MT, Tasende JD, Campos AP. et al. EUS-FNA of pancreatic cystic lesions: Should the endoscopic ultrasonographer learn to process the sample in the room?. Endosc Ultrasound 2023; 12: 309-310
  • 241 Wong N, Gwiti P, Murigu T. et al. Cell block processing is optimal for assessing endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration specimens of pancreatic mucinous cysts. J Clin Pathol 2020; 73: 102-106
  • 242 Gan Q, Roy-Chowdhuri S, Duose DY. et al. Adequacy evaluation and use of pancreatic adenocarcinoma specimens for next-generation sequencing acquired by endoscopic ultrasound-guided FNA and FNB. Cancer Cytopathol 2022; 130: 275-283
  • 243 Souza da Silva R, Pina MJ, Cirnes L. et al. Comprehensive genomic studies on the cell blocks of pancreatic cancer. Diagnostics (Basel) 2024; 14: 906
  • 244 Bunduc S, Varzaru B, Iacob RA. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration pancreatic adenocarcinoma samples yield adequate DNA for next-generation sequencing: A cohort analysis. World J Gastroenterol 2023; 29: 2864-2874
  • 245 Mohamed WT, Jahagirdar V, Jaber F. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy versus aspiration for tissue sampling adequacy for molecular testing in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Cancers (Basel) 2024; 16: 761
  • 246 Biermann K, Lozano Escario MD, Hebert-Magee S. et al. How to prepare, handle, read, and improve EUS-FNA and fine-needle biopsy for solid pancreatic lesions: The pathologist's role. Endosc Ultrasound 2017; 6: S95-S98