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

被引:74
|
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
    [J]. 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
    [J]. 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
    [J]. 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
    [J]. SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2022, 36 (02): : 904 - 910
  • [5] EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration in the mediastinum
    Barawi, M
    Gress, M
    [J]. 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
    [J]. 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
    [J]. 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.
    [J]. 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
    [J]. GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2001, 53 (04) : 470 - 474
  • [10] Maximizing the yield of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration
    Chang, KJ
    [J]. GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2002, 56 (04) : S28 - S34