EUS-FNA versus ERCP for tissue diagnosis of suspect malignant biliary strictures: a prospective comparative study

Abstract

Background and study aims Biliary strictures are frequently a challenging clinical scenario and the anatomopathological diagnosis is essential in the therapeutic management, whether for curative or palliative purposes. The acquisition of specimens is necessary since many benign diseases mimic biliopancreatic neoplasms. Endscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is the traditionally used method despite the low sensitivity of biliary brush cytology and forceps biopsy. On the other hand, several studies reported good accuracy rates using endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). The aim of this prospective study was to compare, the accuracy of EUS-FNA and ERCP for tissue sampling of biliary strictures.

Patients and methods After performing the sample size calculation, 50 consecutive patients with indeterminate biliary strictures were included to undergo ERCP and EUS on the same sedation.The gold-standard was surgery or 6 months’ follow-up. Evaluation of the diagnostic indices (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, positive and negative likelihood ratio), concordance and adverse events among the methods were performed. Also, subtype analyses of the techniques, anatomical localization and size of the lesion were included.

Results The final diagnoses reported in 50 patients were 47 malignant, 1 suspicious and 2 benign lesions. 31 lesions were extraductal and 19 intraductal, 35 were distal and 15 proximal strictures. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the sensitivity and accuracy of EUS-FNA were superior than ERCP tissue sampling (93,8 %, 94 % vs. 60,4 %, 62 %, respectively) (P = 0.034), with similar adverse events. There was no concordance between the methods and combining both methods improved the sensitivity and accuracy for 97.9 % and 98 %, respectively. In the subtype analyses, the EUS-FNA was superior, with a higher accuracy than ERCP tissue sampling in evaluating extraductal lesions (100 % vs. 54.8 %, P = 0.019) and in those larger than 1.5 cm (95.8 % vs. 61.9 %, P = 0.031), but were similar in evaluating intraductal lesions and lesions smaller than 1.5 cm. There was no significant difference between the methods in the analyzes of proximal, distal and pancreatic lesions.

Conclusion EUS-FNA is better than ERCP with brush cytology and intraductal forceps biopsy in diagnosing malignant biliary strictures, mainly in the assessment of extraductal lesions and in those larger than 1.5 cm. Combining ERCP with tissue sampling and EUS-FNA is feasible, the techniques have similar complication rates, and the combination greatly improves diagnostic accuracy.

• References

• 1 De Moura DT, Moura EG, Bernardo WM. et al. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography versus endoscopic ultrasound for tissue diagnosis of malignant biliary stricture: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Ultrasound 2016; DOI: 10.4103/2303-9027.193597. [Epub ahead of print]
• 2 Navaneethan U, Njei B, Lourdusamy V. et al. Comparative effectiveness of biliary brush cytology and intraductal biopsy for detection of malignant biliary strictures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 168-176
• 3 Yoon WJ, Brugge WR. Endoscopic evaluation of bile duct strictures. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2013; 23: 277-293
• 4 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) Standards of Practice Committee, Anderson MA, Appalaneni V, Ben-Menachem T et al. The role of endoscopy in the evaluation and treatment of patients with biliary neoplasia. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 77: 167-174
• 5 DeWitt J, Misra VL, Leblanc JK. et al. EUS-guided FNA of proximal biliary strictures after negative ERCP brush cytology results. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 64: 325-333
• 6 Fritscher-Ravens A, Broering DC, Knoefel WT. et al. EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration of suspected hilar cholangiocarcinoma in potentially operable patients with negative brush cytology. Am J Gastroenterol 2004; 99: 45-51
• 7 Cui XW, Ignee A, Braden B. et al. Biliary papillomatosis and new ultrasound imaging modalities. Z Gastroenterol 2012; 50: 226-231
• 8 Fusaroli P, Napoleon B, Gincul R. et al. The clinical impact of ultrasound contrast agents in EUS: a systematic review according to the levels of evidence. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 84: 587-596
• 9 Korc P, Sherman S. ERCP tissue sampling. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 84: 557-571
• 10 Ponchon T, Gagnon F, Berger F. Value of endobiliary brush cytology and biopsies for the diagnosis of malignant bile duct stenosis: results of a prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc 1995; 42: 565-572
• 11 Burnett AS, Calvert TJ, Chokshi RJ. Sensitivity of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography standard cytology: 10-y review of the literature. J Surg Res 2013; 184: 304-311
• 12 Nanda A, Brown JM, Berger SH. et al. Triple modality testing by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for the diagnosis of cholangiocarcinoma. Therap Adv Gastroenterol 2015; 8: 56-65
• 13 Bosman FT, Carneiro F, Hruban RH. et al. WHO classification of tumors of the digestive system. Vol. 3. 4. ed. WHO/IARC classification of tumors; 2010
• 14 Pocock SJ. Clinical Trials: A Practilcal Approach. Wiley; 1983. Sealed Envelope Ltd. Power calculator for binary outcome superiority trial. [Online] Avaiable from: https://www.sealedenvelope.com/power/binary-superiority/
• 15 Catmaker. Available at: http://www.cebm.net/catmaker-ebm-calculators/
• 16 Busnello EllisDʼA, Tannous L, Gigante L. et al. Confiabilidade diagnóstica dos transtornos mentais da versão para cuidados primários da Classificação Internacional das Doenças. Rev. Saúde Pública 1999; 33: 487-494 [cited 2017 Jan 30]
• 17 Freeman ML, Nelson DB, Sherman S. et al. Complications of endoscopic biliary sphincterotomy. N Engl J Med 1996; 335: 909-918
• 18 De Bellis M, Sherman S, Fogel EL. et al. Tissue sampling at ERCP in suspected malignant biliary strictures (Part 1). Gastrointest. Endosc 2002; 56: 552-561
• 19 De Bellis M, Sherman S, Fogel EL. et al. Tissue sampling at ERCP in suspected malignant biliary strictures (Part 2). Gastrointest. Endosc 2002; 56: 720-730
• 20 Menzel J, Poremba C, Dietl KH. et al. Tumors of the papilla of Vater– inadequate diagnostic impact of endoscopic forceps biopsies taken prior to and following sphincterotomy. Ann Oncol 1999; 10: 1227-1231
• 21 Onda S, Ogura T, Kurisu Y. et al. EUS-guided FNA for biliary disease as first-line modality to obtain histological evidence. Therap Adv Gastroenterol 2016; 9: 302-312
• 22 Mohamadnejad M, DeWitt JM, Sherman S. et al. Role of EUS for preoperative evaluation of cholangiocarcinoma: a large single-center experience. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 71-78
• 23 Eloubeidi MA, Chen VK, Jhala NC. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy of suspected cholangiocarcinoma. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2004; 2: 209-213
• 24 Rösch T, Hofrichter K, Frimberger E. et al. ERCP or EUS for tissue diagnosis of biliary strictures? A prospective comparative study. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 60: 390-396
• 25 Novis M, Ardengh JC, Libera ED. et al. Prospective comparative study of ERCP brush cytology and EUS-FNA for the differential diagnosis of biliary strictures. Rev Col Bras Cir 2010; 37: 190-198
• 26 Oppong K, Raine D, Nayar M. et al. EUS-FNA versus biliary brushings and assessment of simultaneous performance in jaundiced patients with suspected malignant obstruction. JOP 2010; 11: 560-567
• 27 Weilert F, Bhat YM, Binmoeller KF. et al. EUS-FNA is superior to ERCP-based tissue sampling in suspected malignant biliary obstruction: results of a prospective, single-blind, comparative study. Gastrointest Endosc 2014; 80: 97-104
• 28 Wight CO, Zaitoun AM, Boulton-Jones JR. et al. Improving diagnostic yield of biliary brushings cytology for pancreatic cancer and cholangiocarcinoma. Cytopathology 2004; 15: 87-92
• 29 Naitoh I, Nakazawa T, Kato A. et al. Predictive factors for positive diagnosis of malignant biliary strictures by transpapillary brush cytology and forceps biopsy. J Dig Dis 2016; 17: 44-51
• 30 Lee JG, Leung JW, Baillie J. et al. Benign, dysplastic, or malignant--making sense of endoscopic bile duct brush cytology: results in 149 consecutive patients. Am J Gastroenterol 1995; 90: 722-726
• 31 Logroño R, Wong JY. Reporting the presence of significant epithelial atypia in pancreaticobiliary brush cytology specimens lacking evidence of obvious carcinoma: impact on performance measures. Acta Cytol 2004; 48: 613-621
• 32 Moreno-Luna LE, Kipp B, Halling KC. Advanced cytologic techniques for the detection of malignant pancreatobiliary strictures. Gastroenterology 2006; 131: 1064-1072
• 33 Levy MJ, Baron TH, Calyton AC. Prospective evaluation of advanced molecular markers and imaging techniques in patients with indeter- minate bile duct strictures. Am J Gastroenterol 2008; 103: 1263-1273
• 34 Tanaka M, Chari S, Adsay V. et al. International consensus guidelines for management of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms and mucinous cystic neoplasms of the pancreas. Pancreatology 2006; 6: 17-32
• 35 Navaneethan U, Hasan MK, Lourdusamy V. et al. Single-operator cholangioscopy and targeted biopsies in the diagnosis of indeterminate biliary strictures: a systematic review. Gastrointest Endosc 10/2015; 82: 608-614
• 36 American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2013. Atlanta (Ga): American Cancer Society; 2013