Explore the vast range of titles available.

Observational data on the impact of on-site cytopathology evaluation (OCE) during endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of pancreatic masses have reported conflicting results. We aimed to compare the diagnostic yield of malignancy and proportion of inadequate specimens between patients undergoing EUS-FNA of pancreatic masses with and without OCE. In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, consecutive patients with solid pancreatic mass underwent randomization for EUS-FNA with or without OCE. The number of FNA passes in the OCE+ arm was dictated by the on-site cytopathologist, whereas seven passes were performed in OCE- arm. EUS-FNA protocol was standardized, and slides were reviewed by cytopathologists using standardized criteria for cytologic characteristics and diagnosis. A total of 241 patients (121 OCE+, 120 OCE-) were included. There was no difference between the two groups in diagnostic yield of malignancy (OCE+ 75.2% vs. OCE- 71.6%, P=0.45) and proportion of inadequate specimens (9.8 vs. 13.3%, P=0.31). Procedures in OCE+ group required fewer EUS-FNA passes (median, OCE+ 4 vs. OCE- 7, P<0.0001). There was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to overall procedure time, adverse events, number of repeat procedures, costs (based on baseline cost-minimization analysis), and accuracy (using predefined criteria for final diagnosis of malignancy). There was no difference between the two groups with respect to cytologic characteristics of cellularity, bloodiness, number of cells/slide, and contamination. Results of this study demonstrated no significant difference in the diagnostic yield of malignancy, proportion of inadequate specimens, and accuracy in patients with pancreatic mass undergoing EUS-FNA with or without OCE.

Abstract Introduction: Observational data suggest that the 19-gauge (G) needle for endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS)-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA) offers a higher diagnostic yield than the 22-G needle in sarcoidosis. No randomized trial has compared the yield of the two needles. Methods: We randomized consecutive subjects with suspected sarcoidosis and enlarged thoracic lymph nodes to undergo EBUS-TBNA with either the 19-G or the 22-G needle. We compared the study groups for diagnostic sensitivity (primary outcome) assessed by the yield of granulomas in subjects finally diagnosed with sarcoidosis. We also compared the sample adequacy, difficulty performing the needle puncture assessed on a visual analog scale (VAS), the subject’s cough intensity on an operator-rated VAS, and procedure-related complications (secondary outcomes). Results: We randomized 150 (mean age, 43.0 years; 55% women) subjects and diagnosed sarcoidosis in 116 subjects. The diagnostic sensitivity of the 19-G needle (45/60, 75.0%) was not higher (p = 0.52) than the 22-G needle (39/56, 69.6%). We obtained adequate aspirates in 90.0% and 85.7% of subjects in the respective groups (p = 0.48). The operators had greater difficulty puncturing lymph nodes with the 19-G needle (p = 0.03), while the operator-assessed cough intensity was similar in the groups (p = 0.41). Transient hypoxemia was the only complication encountered during EBUS-TBNA (two subjects in either group). Conclusion: We did not find the 19-G needle superior to the 22-G in diagnostic sensitivity, specimen adequacy, or safety of EBUS-TBNA in sarcoidosis. Puncturing the lymph nodes was more difficult with the 19-G needle.

Abstract Introduction: During endobronchial ultrasound transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA), a saline-filled balloon placed over the tip of the bronchoscope is used to improve coupling of the ultrasound transducer to the airway wall. However, it is unknown whether it objectively improves image quality or affects procedural outcomes. Our aim was to establish whether the use of a balloon during EBUS impacts image quality, diagnostic yield, procedure duration or complications. Methods: A pilot randomized control trial of patients undergoing EBUS-TBNA of mediastinal lymph nodes was performed at a single academic center. Patients were randomized to use a saline-filled balloon (versus no balloon use) during EBUS-TBNA of the right lower paratracheal lymph node (station 4R). The EBUS videos were recorded and scored on a 4-point Likert scale by three blinded external reviewers. The primary outcome of this study was ultrasound image quality. Secondary outcomes included diagnostic yield, procedure duration, and complications. Results: Forty-six patients were randomized. In the balloon group, 61% of patients had an image quality score of “excellent” or “good,” compared to 47% in the no balloon group (p = 0.009). There was no significant difference in diagnostic yield, procedure duration, or complications between the groups. Conclusion: Inflation of the balloon during EBUS-TBNA at the right lower paratracheal lymph node improves ultrasound image quality but does not impact diagnostic yield, procedure duration, or safety. This study provides a framework for additional studies with complete nodal assessment to determine if balloon use has a clinically meaningful benefit to procedural outcomes.

BackgroundIn a tertiary center setting we aimed to study the diagnostic accuracy and clinical impact of EUS-guided biopsy sampling (EUS-FNB) with a reverse bevel needle compared with that of fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in the work-up of subepithelial lesions (SEL).MethodsAll patients presenting with SELs referred for EUS-guided sampling were prospectively included in 2012–2015. After randomization of the first pass modality, dual sampling with both EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA was performed in each lesion. Outcome measures in an intention-to-diagnose analysis were the diagnostic accuracy, technical failures, and adverse events. The clinical impact was measured as the performance of additional diagnostic procedures post-EUS and the rate of unwarranted resections compared with a reference cohort of SELs sampled in the same institution 2006–2011.ResultsIn 70 dual sampling procedures of unique lesions (size: 6–220 mm) the diagnostic sensitivity for malignancy and the overall accuracy of EUS-FNB was superior to EUS-FNA compared head-to-head (90 vs 52%, and 83 vs 49%, both p < 0.001). The adverse event rate of EUS-FNB was low (1.2%). EUS-FNB in 2012–2015 had a positive clinical impact in comparison with the reference cohort demonstrated by less cases referred for an additional diagnostic procedure, 12/83 (14%) vs 39/73 (53%), p < 0.001, and fewer unwarranted resections in cases subjected to surgery, 3/48 (6%) vs 12/35 (34%), p = 0.001.ConclusionsEUS-FNB with a reverse bevel needle is safe and superior to EUS-FNA in providing a conclusive diagnosis of subepithelial lesions. This biopsy sampling approach facilitates a rational clinical management and accurate treatment.

Background Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) plus surgery is a standard treatment for locally advanced oesophageal cancer. With this treatment, 29% of patients have a pathologically complete response in the resection specimen. This provides the rationale for investigating an active surveillance approach. The aim of this study is to assess the (cost-)effectiveness of active surveillance vs. standard oesophagectomy after nCRT for oesophageal cancer. Methods This is a phase-III multi-centre, stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial. A total of 300 patients with clinically complete response (cCR, i.e. no local or disseminated disease proven by histology) after nCRT will be randomised to show non-inferiority of active surveillance to standard oesophagectomy (non-inferiority margin 15%, intra-correlation coefficient 0.02, power 80%, 2-sided α 0.05, 12% drop-out). Patients will undergo a first clinical response evaluation (CRE-I) 4–6 weeks after nCRT, consisting of endoscopy with bite-on-bite biopsies of the primary tumour site and other suspected lesions. Clinically complete responders will undergo a second CRE (CRE-II), 6–8 weeks after CRE-I. CRE-II will include 18F–FDG-PET-CT, followed by endoscopy with bite-on-bite biopsies and ultra-endosonography plus fine needle aspiration of suspected lymph nodes and/or PET- positive lesions. Patients with cCR at CRE-II will be assigned to oesophagectomy (first phase) or active surveillance (second phase of the study). The duration of the first phase is determined randomly over the 12 centres, i.e., stepped-wedge cluster design. Patients in the active surveillance arm will undergo diagnostic evaluations similar to CRE-II at 6/9/12/16/20/24/30/36/48 and 60 months after nCRT. In this arm, oesophagectomy will be offered only to patients in whom locoregional regrowth is highly suspected or proven, without distant dissemination. The main study parameter is overall survival; secondary endpoints include percentage of patients who do not undergo surgery, quality of life, clinical irresectability (cT4b) rate, radical resection rate, postoperative complications, progression-free survival, distant dissemination rate, and cost-effectiveness. We hypothesise that active surveillance leads to non-inferior survival, improved quality of life and a reduction in costs, compared to standard oesophagectomy. Discussion If active surveillance and surgery as needed after nCRT leads to non-inferior survival compared to standard oesophagectomy, this organ-sparing approach can be implemented as a standard of care.

Liver biopsy (LB) remains essential for the diagnosis and staging of parenchymal liver diseases. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided LB (EUS-LB) has emerged as an attractive alternative to percutaneous and transjugular routes. We aimed at comparing the adequacy of samples obtained by EUS-LB with percutaneous LB. A single-center, randomized, controlled clinical trial was designed. Patients undergoing LB were randomly assigned to EUS-LB or percutaneous LB groups. EUS-LB was performed with a 19-gauge Franseen core needle through a transduodenal and transgastric route. Percutaneous LB was performed with a 16-gauge Tru-Cut needle. The main outcome was the percentage of adequate samples obtained. Secondary outcomes were the percentage of accurate histologic diagnosis, number of complete portal tracts (CPT), total and longest specimen length (TSL and LSL), sample fragmentation, adverse events, and patients' satisfaction. An adequate specimen was defined as TSL ≥20 mm and including ≥11 CPT. Ninety patients were randomized (44 to EUS-LB and 46 to percutaneous LB) and included in the analysis. The percentage of adequate tissue samples was 32.6% and 70.4% for percutaneous LB and EUS-LB, respectively ( P < 0.001). A final histologic diagnosis was provided in all cases but one. TSL was longer after EUS-LB (23.5 vs 17.5 mm, P = 0.01), whereas the number of CPT was similar in both groups. Sample fragmentation occurred more often after EUS-LB ( P < 0.001). No differences in adverse events were found. Satisfaction reported with both procedures was high. EUS-LB is safe and accurate and may be considered an alternative to percutaneous LB for the evaluation of parenchymal liver diseases.

IntroductionMediastinal and/or hilar lymphadenopathy (MHL) is increasingly identified owing to various underlying conditions. Minimally invasive biopsy techniques, including endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA), transbronchial mediastinal cryobiopsy (TBMC) and transbronchial forceps biopsy (TBFB), are common diagnosis tools. However, their safety and diagnostic efficiency remain unclear. This trial aims to compare the diagnostic yield and safety of these three techniques.Methods and analysisThis study is a three-arm, parallel-design, randomised controlled trial involving 972 adult patients with MHL recruited from multiple medical centres. Participants will be randomly assigned to the EBUS-TBNA, TBMC via a tunnel or TBFB via a tunnel group. The primary outcome is diagnostic yield, and the secondary outcomes include diagnostic sensitivity, sample quality and procedure-related complications. Statistical analyses will be conducted using the appropriate methods. An independent sample χ² test will be used to test the differences in the diagnostic yield and incidence of procedure-related complications.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was obtained from the China-Japan Friendship Hospital Ethics Committee (2022-KY-194).Written informed consent will be obtained from all patients or their guardians before their enrolment in the study. This study will be conducted per the principles established in the Declaration of Helsinki and the International Council for Harmonisation Guidelines for Good Clinical Practice.Trial registration numberwww.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT06262620).

BackgroundTo compare the diagnostic yield and safety of 22G endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) in the diagnosis of pancreatic solid lesions.MethodsBetween April 2014 and September 2015, 36 patients with pancreatic solid lesions were included for endoscopic ultrasound test. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: EUS-FNA (n = 18) and EUS-FNB (n = 18). Each nidus was punctured three times (15 ~ 20 insertions for each puncture) with a 22G needle. The core specimens were analyzed, and the diagnostic yields of FNA and FNB were evaluated.ResultsThe procedure success rate was 100% with no complications. Cytological and histological examinations found that the diagnostic yield of FNB and FNA were both 83.3%. To get a definitive diagnosis, FNB needed fewer punctures than FNA (1.11 vs. 1.83; P  <  0.05).Conclusions22G EUS-FNB is a safe and effective way to diagnose pancreatic solid lesions. FNB required a lower number of needle passes to achieve a diagnosis compared with FNA.