Efficacy of serial pancreatic juice aspiration cytological examination for focal pancreatic duct stenosis: Multicenter, retrospective, cohort study

Abstract

Background and study aims

Early diagnosis of pancreatic cancer is crucial for improving patient prognosis. However, diagnosing pancreatic cancer in the absence of a distinct mass is challenging due to limitations of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). Recent studies have suggested that serial pancreatic juice aspiration cytological examination (SPACE) for focal pancreatic duct stenosis may improve diagnostic yield in cases of pancreatic cancer without obvious mass. The aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy of SPACE in diagnosis of focal pancreatic duct stenosis.

Patients and methods

A retrospective analysis of data from patients who underwent SPACE for pancreatic ductal stenosis between January 2017 and January 2023 was performed. Primary outcomes included diagnostic capability (sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy) and safety of SPACE.

Results

SPACE was performed on 46 patients with focal pancreatic duct stenosis. Initial cytology demonstrated sensitivity of 45.0%, specificity of 84.6%, and accuracy of 67.3%. In contrast, SPACE yielded a significantly improved sensitivity of 90.0% (P = 0.006) and an accuracy of 89.1% (P = 0.045). Sensitivity of SPACE increased with the number of cytological examinations: 45% for one submission; 70% for two; 80% for three; 85% for four; and plateaued at 90% for five or more 5. Adverse events occurred in 19.6% of patients, including pancreatitis (mild in 7, moderate in 1) and one case of guidewire penetration of the pancreatic duct.

Conclusions

SPACE was a valuable method for obtaining pathological specimens of focal pancreatic duct stenosis. It yielded improved diagnostic sensitivity and accuracy compared with initial cytology alone.

Keywords

Pancreatobiliary (ERCP/PTCD) - GI Pathology - Strictures

Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 07. Februar 2025

Angenommen nach Revision: 08. Juli 2025

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
29. Juli 2025

• References

• 1 Ilic I, Ilic M. International patterns in incidence and mortality trends of pancreatic cancer in the last three decades: A joinpoint regression analysis. World J Gastroenterol 2022; 28: 4698-4715
• 2 Pancreas. Center for Cancer Control and Information Services. https://ganjoho.jp/reg_stat/statistics/stat/cancer/10_pancreas.html#anchor1
• 3 Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE. et al. Cancer statistics, 2021. CA Cancer J Clin 2021; 71: 7-33
• 4 Egawa S, Toma H, Ohigashi H. et al. Japan pancreatic cancer registry; 30th year anniversary: Japan pancreas society. Pancreas 2012; 41: 985-992
• 5 Takano S, Fukasawa M, Enomoto N. Molecular assessment of endoscopically collected pancreatic juice and duodenal fluid from patients with pancreatic diseases. Dig Endosc 2023; 35: 19-32
• 6 Satoh T, Kawaguchi S, Takeda S. et al. Comparison of diagnostic yield and safety of serial pancreatic juice aspiration cytologic examination (space) with different indications. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 13: 1498
• 7 Iiboshi T, Hanada K, Fukuda T. et al. Value of cytodiagnosis using endoscopic nasopancreatic drainage for early diagnosis of pancreatic cancer: Establishing a new method for the early detection of pancreatic carcinoma in situ. Pancreas 2012; 41: 523-529
• 8 Satoh T, Kikuyama M, Kawaguchi S. et al. Acute pancreatitis-onset carcinoma in situ of the pancreas with focal fat replacement diagnosed using serial pancreatic-juice aspiration cytologic examination (space). Clin J Gastroenterol 2017; 10: 541-545
• 9 Yamakawa K, Masuda A, Nakagawa T. et al. Evaluation of efficacy of pancreatic juice cytology for risk classification according to international consensus guidelines in patients with intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm; a retrospective study. Pancreatology 2019; 19: 424-428
• 10 Cotton PB, Eisen GM, Aabakken L. et al. A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: Report of an asge workshop. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 446-454
• 11 Cotton PB, Garrow DA, Gallagher J. et al. Risk factors for complications after ercp: A multivariate analysis of 11,497 procedures over 12 years. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 70: 80-88
• 12 Kanda Y. Investigation of the freely available easy-to-use software 'ezr' for medical statistics. Bone Marrow Transplant 2013; 48: 452-458
• 13 Mikata R, Ishihara T, Tada M. et al. Clinical usefulness of repeated pancreatic juice cytology via endoscopic naso-pancreatic drainage tube in patients with pancreatic cancer. J Gastroenterol 2013; 48: 866-873
• 14 Ikemoto J, Serikawa M, Hanada K. et al. Clinical analysis of early-stage pancreatic cancer and proposal for a new diagnostic algorithm: A multicenter observational study. Diagnostics (Basel) 2021; 11
• 15 Mie T, Sasaki T, Takeda T. et al. Diagnostic yield of serial pancreatic juice aspiration cytologic examination with brush cytology for pancreatic ductal stenosis. Pancreas 2022; 51: 995-999
• 16 Kitagawa K, Mitoro A, Tomooka F. et al. Diagnostic yield of liquid-based cytology in serial pancreatic juice aspiration cytological examination. DEN Open 2023; 3: e177
• 17 Nakamura S, Ishii Y, Serikawa M. et al. Diagnostic ability and safety of repeated pancreatic juice cytology using an endoscopic nasopancreatic drainage catheter for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A multicenter prospective study. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 13: 2696
• 18 Takeda Y, Matsumoto K, Onoyama T. et al. Pancreatic juice cytology evaluations using synthetic secretin and serial pancreatic juice aspiration cytological examination for the diagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Diagnostics (Basel) 2023; 13: 1536
• 19 Takasawa O, Fujita N, Noda Y. et al. Clinicopathological study on the intraductal spread of small pancreatic cancer. J Gastroenterol 2007; 42: 957-961
• 20 Hanada K, Shimizu A, Kurihara K. et al. Endoscopic approach in the diagnosis of high-grade pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia. Dig Endosc 2022; 34: 927-937
• 21 Mouri T, Sasaki T, Serikawa M. et al. A comparison of 4-fr with 5-fr endoscopic nasopancreatic drainage catheters: A randomized, controlled trial. J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 31: 1783-1789
• 22 Itonaga M, Ashida R, Kitano M. Updated techniques and evidence for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition from solid pancreatic lesions. DEN Open 2025; 5: e399
• 23 Banafea O, Mghanga FP, Zhao J. et al. Endoscopic ultrasonography with fine-needle aspiration for histological diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses: A meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies. BMC Gastroenterol 2016; 16: 108
• 24 Puli SR, Bechtold ML, Buxbaum JL. et al. How good is endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in diagnosing the correct etiology for a solid pancreatic mass?: A meta-analysis and systematic review. Pancreas 2013; 42: 20-26
• 25 Yang Y, Li L, Qu C. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle core biopsy for the diagnosis of pancreatic malignant lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep 2016; 6: 22978
• 26 Jenssen C, Faiss S, Nürnberg D. complications of endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic ultrasound-guided interventions - results of a survey among german centers. Z Gastroenterol 2008; 46: 1177-1184
• 27 Eloubeidi MA, Tamhane A, Varadarajulu S. et al. Frequency of major complications after eus-guided fna of solid pancreatic masses: A prospective evaluation. Gastrointest Endosc 2006; 63: 622-629
• 28 Kanno A, Masamune A, Hanada K. et al. Multicenter study of early pancreatic cancer in Japan. Pancreatology 2018; 18: 61-67
• 29 Yane K, Kuwatani M, Yoshida M. et al. Non-negligible rate of needle tract seeding after endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic cancer. Dig Endosc 2020; 32: 801-811
• 30 Sawai G, Dainaka K, Juichiro Y. et al. A case of needle tract seeding with endoscopic findings of progression over time. DEN Open 2024; 4: e368