Comparison between EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology and EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy histology for the evaluation of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors

被引:81
|
作者
Crino, Stefano Francesco [1 ]
Ammendola, Serena [2 ]
Meneghetti, Anna [1 ]
Bernardoni, Laura [1 ]
Bellocchi, Maria Cristina Conti [1 ]
Gabbrielli, Armando [1 ]
Landoni, Luca [3 ]
Paiella, Salvatore [3 ]
Pin, Federico [1 ]
Parisi, Alice [2 ]
Mastrosimini, Maria Gaia [2 ]
Amodio, Antonio [1 ]
Frulloni, Luca [1 ]
Facciorusso, Antonio [4 ]
Larghi, Alberto [5 ]
Manfrin, Erminia [2 ]
机构
[1] GB Rossi Univ Hosp, Pancreas Inst, Gastroenterol & Digest Endoscopy Unit, Verona, Italy
[2] GB Rossi Univ Hosp, Dept Diagnost & Publ Hlth, Verona, Italy
[3] Univ Verona Hosp Trust, Pancreas Inst, Dept Gen & Pancreat Surg, Verona, Italy
[4] Univ Foggia, Dept Med Sci, Digest Endoscopy Unit, Foggia, Italy
[5] IRCCS, Digest Endoscopy Unit, Fdn Policlin Univ A Gemelli, Rome, Italy
关键词
Ki-67 proliferative index; Pancreatic surgery; Small pNET; Endoscopic ultrasound tissue acquisition;
D O I
10.1016/j.pan.2020.12.015
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Background/objectives: Studies comparing EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) with EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) for the evaluation of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNETs) are lacking. We aimed at comparing EUS-FNA with EUS-FNB in terms of Ki-67 proliferative index (PI) estimation capability, cellularity of the samples, and reliability of Ki-67 PI/tumor grading compared with surgical specimens. Methods: Patients diagnosed with pNETs on EUS and/or surgical specimens were retrospectively identified. Specimens were re-evaluated to assess Ki-67 PI feasibility, sample cellularity by manual counting, and determination of Ki-67 PI value. Outcomes in the EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB groups were compared. Kendall rank test was used for Ki-67 PI correlation between EUS and surgical specimens. Subgroup analysis including small (<= 20 mm), non-functioning pNETs was performed. Results: Three-hundred samples from 292 lesions were evaluated: 69 EUS-FNA cytology and 231 EUS-FNB histology. Ki-67 PI feasibility was similar for EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB (91.3% vs. 95.7%, p = 0.15), while EUS-FNB performed significantly better in the subgroup of 179 small pNETs (88.2% vs. 96.1%, p = 0.04). Rate of poor cellulated (<500 cells) specimens was equal between EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB. A significant correlation for Ki-67 PI values between EUS and 92 correspondent surgical specimens was found in both groups, but it was stronger with EUS-FNB (tau = 0.626, p < 0.0001 vs. tau = 0.452, p = 0.031). Correct grading estimation was comparable between the two groups (p = 0.482). Conclusion: Our study showed stronger correlation for Ki-67 values between EUS-FNB and surgical specimens, and that EUS-FNB outperformed EUS-FNA in the evaluation of small pNETs. EUS-FNB should become standard of care for grading assessment of suspected pNETs. (C) 2020 IAP and EPC. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:443 / 450
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Effectiveness of EUS-Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy versus EUS-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration: A Retrospective Analysis
    Kuraoka, Naosuke
    Hashimoto, Satoru
    Matsui, Shigeru
    Terai, Shuji
    DIAGNOSTICS, 2021, 11 (06)
  • [2] Randomized crossover trial comparing EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration with EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy for gastric subepithelial tumors
    Iwai, Tomohisa
    Kida, Mitsuhiro
    Imaizumi, Hiroshi
    Miyazawa, Shiro
    Okuwaki, Kosuke
    Yamauchi, Hiroshi
    Kaneko, Toru
    Hasegawa, Rikiya
    Miyata, Eiji
    Koizumi, Wasaburo
    DIAGNOSTIC CYTOPATHOLOGY, 2018, 46 (03) : 228 - 233
  • [3] Comparison of EUS-guided 19-gauge Trucut needle biopsy with EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration
    Varadarajulu, S
    Fraig, M
    Schmulewitz, N
    Roberts, S
    Wildi, S
    Hawes, RH
    Hoffman, BJ
    Wallace, MB
    ENDOSCOPY, 2004, 36 (05) : 397 - 401
  • [4] Diagnostic value of SpyGlass for pancreatic cystic lesions: comparison of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration and EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration combined with SpyGlass
    Du, Chen
    Chai, Ningli
    Linghu, Enqiang
    Li, Huikai
    Feng, Xiuxue
    Wang, Xiangdong
    Tang, Ping
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2022, 36 (02): : 904 - 910
  • [5] EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration in the mediastinum
    Barawi, M
    Gress, M
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2000, 52 (06) : S12 - S17
  • [6] Diagnostic value of SpyGlass for pancreatic cystic lesions: comparison of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration and EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration combined with SpyGlass
    Chen Du
    Ningli Chai
    Enqiang Linghu
    Huikai Li
    Xiuxue Feng
    Xiangdong Wang
    Ping Tang
    Surgical Endoscopy, 2022, 36 : 904 - 910
  • [7] Detection of pancreatic metastases by EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration
    Fritscher-Ravens, A
    Sriram, PVJ
    Krause, C
    Jaeckle, S
    Thonke, F
    Brand, B
    Bohnacker, S
    Soehendra, N
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2001, 53 (01) : 65 - 70
  • [8] Comparison of EUS-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration Alone Versus Combined Fine-Needle Aspiration and Fine-Needle Biopsy in the Diagnostic Evaluation of Solid Pancreatic Lesions
    Wadhwa, Vaibhav
    Gonzalez, Adalberto
    Singh, Harjinder
    Ahmed, Ishtiaq
    Erim, Tolga
    Sanaka, Madhusudhan R.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2019, 114 : S52 - S52
  • [9] Assessment of complications of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration
    O'Toole, D
    Palazzo, L
    Arotçarena, R
    Dancour, A
    Aubert, A
    Hammel, P
    Amaris, J
    Ruszniewski, P
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2001, 53 (04) : 470 - 474
  • [10] Clinical Impact of EUS-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration
    Chennat, Jennifer
    Waxman, Irving
    NEW CHALLENGES IN GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2008, : 517 - 525