Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration vs fine-needle biopsy for the diagnosis of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

Abstract

Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) as a method of obtaining preoperative diagnosis of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNETs) has been reported in several series. Fine-needle biopsies (FNB) are increasingly employed to obtain core specimens during EUS. However, the differences in efficacy between these sampling methods in the diagnosis of PanNETs still needs to be defined.

Patients and methods Over a 13-year period, all patients who underwent EUS-guided tissue sampling of suspicious pancreatic lesions with clinical, endoscopic and pathologic details were entered into an electronic database. Lesions underwent EUS-FNA or FNB sampling, or a combination of the two. The accuracy and safety of different EUS-guided sampling methods for confirmed PanNETs were investigated.

Results A total of 91 patients (M/F: 42/49, median age: 57 years), who underwent 102 EUS procedures had a final diagnosis of PanNET. Both EUS-guided sampling modalities were used in 28 procedures, EUS-FNA alone was used in 61 cases, while EUS-FNB alone in 13 cases. Diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB alone, including the inadequate specimens, was 77.5 % (95 %CI: 68.9 – 86.2 %) and 85.4 % (95 %CI: 74.6 – 96.2 %), respectively. The combination of both sampling modalities established the diagnosis in 96.4 % of cases (27/28) (95 %CI: 89.6 – 100 %), significantly superior to EUS-FNA alone (P = 0.023). Diagnostic sensitivity among the adequate samples for EUS-FNA, EUS-FNB and for the combination of the two methods was 88.4 % (95 %CI: 80.9 – 96.0 %), 94.3 % (95 %CI: 86.6 – 100 %) and 100 % (95 %CI: 100 – 100 %). There was one reported complication, a post-FNA bleeding, treated conservatively.

Conclusions EUS-FNB improves diagnostic sensitivity and confers additional information to cytological assessment of PanNETs.

• References

• 1 Dasari A, Shen C, Halperin D. et al. Trends in the incidence, prevalence, and survival outcomes in patients with neuroendocrine tumors in the United States. JAMA Oncol 2017; 3: 1335-1342
• 2 Cives M, Strosberg JR. Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. CA Cancer J Clin 2018; 68: 471-487
• 3 Norton JA, Fraker DL, Alexander HR. et al. Surgery to cure the Zollinger-Ellison syndrome. N Engl J Med 1999; 341: 635-644
• 4 Wiedenmann B, Jensen RT, Mignon M. et al. Preoperative diagnosis and surgical management of neuroendocrine gastroenteropancreatic tumors: general recommendations by a consensus workshop. World J Surg 1998; 22: 309-318
• 5 Bombardieri E, Seregni E, Villano C. et al. Position of nuclear medicine techniques in the diagnostic work-up of neuroendocrine tumors. Q J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 48: 150-163
• 6 Chiti A, Fanti S, Savelli G. et al. Comparison of somatostatin receptor imaging, computed tomography and ultrasound in the clinical management of neuroendocrine gastro-entero-pancreatic tumours. Eur J Nucl Med 1998; 25: 1396-1403
• 7 Anderson MA, Carpenter S, Thompson NW. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound is highly accurate and directs management in patients with neuroendocrine tumors of the pancreas. Am J Gastroenterol 2000; 95: 2271-2277
• 8 De Angelis C, Carucci P, Repici A. et al. Endosonography in decision making and management of gastrointestinal endocrine tumors. Eur J Ultrasound 1999; 10: 139-150
• 9 Gouya H, Vignaux O, Augui J. et al. CT, endoscopic sonography, and a combined protocol for preoperative evaluation of pancreatic insulinomas. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 181: 987-992
• 10 Lee LS. Diagnosis of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors and the role of endoscopic ultrasound. Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y) 2010; 6: 520-522
• 11 Metz DC, Jensen RT. Gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors: pancreatic endocrine tumors. Gastroenterology 2008; 135: 1469-1492
• 12 Hijioka S, Hara K, Mizuno N. et al. Diagnostic performance and factors influencing the accuracy of EUS-FNA of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms. J Gastroenterol 2016; 51: 923-930
• 13 Ardengh JC, de Paulo GA, Ferrari AP. EUS-guided FNA in the diagnosis of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors before surgery. Gastrointest Endosc 2004; 60: 378-384
• 14 Khashab MA, Yong E, Lennon AM. et al. EUS is still superior to multidetector computerized tomography for detection of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 691-696
• 15 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
• 16 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
• 17 Varadarajulu S, Fraig M, Schmulewitz N. et al. Comparison of EUS-guided 19-gauge Trucut needle biopsy with EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration. Endoscopy 2004; 36: 397-401
• 18 Wittmann J, Kocjan G, Sgouros SN. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue sampling by combined fine needle aspiration and trucut needle biopsy: a prospective study. Cytopathology 2006; 17: 27-33
• 19 Fabbri C, Luigiano C, Maimone A. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of small solid pancreatic lesions using a 22-gauge needle with side fenestration. Surg Endosc 2015; 29: 1586-1590
• 20 Witt BL, Factor RE, Chadwick BE. et al. Evaluation of the SharkCore((R)) needle for EUS-guided core biopsy of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Endosc Ultrasound 2018; 7: 322-328
• 21 Eusebi LH, Mogan S, Johnson G. et al. High diagnostic accuracy and safety of the 22g sharkcore needle for EUS-fine needle biopsy: a retrospective study from two tertiary centers in UK. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85: AB347-AB347
• 22 Ruxton G, Neuhäuser M. Good practice in testing for an association in contingency tables. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 2010; 64: 1505-1513
• 23 R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2017. ISBN 3-900051-07-0 http://www.R-project.org/
• 24 Fritscher-Ravens A, Izbicki JR, Sriram PV. et al. Endosonography-guided, fine-needle aspiration cytology extending the indication for organ-preserving pancreatic surgery. Am J Gastroenterol 2000; 95: 2255-2260
• 25 Ong SL, Garcea G, Pollard CA. et al. A fuller understanding of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours combined with aggressive management improves outcome. Pancreatology 2009; 9: 583-600
• 26 Singh S, Dey C, Kennecke H. et al. Consensus Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Management of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: Guidelines from a Canadian National Expert Group. Ann Surg Oncol 2015; 22: 2685-2699
• 27 Mallery JS, Centeno BA, Hahn PF. et al. Pancreatic tissue sampling guided by EUS, CT/US, and surgery: a comparison of sensitivity and specificity. Gastrointest Endosc 2002; 56: 218-224
• 28 Mitra V, Nayar MK, Leeds JS. et al. Diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)/endoscopic ultrasound--fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) cytology in solid and cystic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis 2015; 24: 69-75
• 29 Klapman JB, Logrono R, Dye CE. et al. Clinical impact of on-site cytopathology interpretation on endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration. Am J Gastroenterol 2003; 98: 1289-1294
• 30 Figueiredo FA, Giovannini M, Monges G. et al. EUS-FNA predicts 5-year survival in pancreatic endocrine tumors. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 70: 907-914
• 31 Atiq M, Bhutani MS, Bektas M. et al. EUS-FNA for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a tertiary cancer center experience. Dig Dis Sci 2012; 57: 791-800
• 32 Pais SA, Al-Haddad M, Mohamadnejad M. et al. EUS for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a single-center, 11-year experience. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 1185-1193
• 33 Voss M, Hammel P, Molas G. et al. Value of endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses. Gut 2000; 46: 244-249
• 34 Aithal GP, Anagnostopoulos GK, Tam W. et al. EUS-guided tissue sampling: comparison of “dual sampling” (Trucut biopsy plus FNA) with “sequential sampling” (Trucut biopsy and then FNA as required). Endoscopy 2007; 39: 725-730
• 35 Jani N, Khalid A, Kaushik N. et al. EUS-guided FNA diagnosis of pancreatic endocrine tumors: new trends identified. Gastrointest Endosc 2008; 67: 44-50
• 36 Chang F, Vu C, Chandra A. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration cytology of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours: cytomorphological and immunocytochemical evaluation. Cytopathology 2006; 17: 10-17
• 37 Chatzipantelis P, Salla C, Konstantinou P. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a study of 48 cases. Cancer 2008; 114: 255-262
• 38 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
• 39 Hedenstrom P, Demir A, Khodakaram K. et al. EUS-guided reverse bevel fine-needle biopsy sampling and open tip fine-needle aspiration in solid pancreatic lesions – a prospective, comparative study. Scand J Gastroenterol 2018; 53: 231-237