| Literature DB >> 30018480 |
María-Victoria Alvarez-Sánchez1, Bertrand Napoléon2.
Abstract
Pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) are increasingly being identified because of the widespread use of high-resolution abdominal imaging. These cysts encompass a spectrum from malignant disease to benign lesions, and therefore, accurate diagnosis is crucial to determine the best management strategy, either surgical resection or surveillance. However, the current standard of diagnosis is not accurate enough due to limitations of imaging and tissue sampling techniques, which entail the risk of unnecessary burdensome surgery for benign lesions or missed opportunities of prophylactic surgery for potentially malignant PCLs. In the last decade, endoscopic innovations based on endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) imaging have emerged, aiming to overcome the present limitations. These new EUS-based technologies are contrast harmonic EUS, needle-based confocal endomicroscopy, through-the-needle cystoscopy and through-the needle intracystic biopsy. Here, we present a comprehensive and critical review of these emerging endoscopic tools for the diagnosis of PCLs, with a special emphasis on feasibility, safety and diagnostic performance.Entities:
Keywords: Confocal endomicroscopy; Contrast harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography; Endoscopic ultrasonography; Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm; Mucinous cystadenoma; Pancreatic cystic lesions; Serous cystadenoma; Through-the-needle cystoscopy; Through-the-needle forceps biopsy
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30018480 PMCID: PMC6048425 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v24.i26.2853
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Gastroenterol ISSN: 1007-9327 Impact factor: 5.742
Contrast harmonic enhanced endoscopic ultrasound in pancreatic cystic lesions
| Yamashita et al[ | P | 17 | Differential diagnosis between mural nodules and mucus clots: CH-EUS: Sen 100%, Spe 80%, PPV 92%, NPV 100%, A 94% CT and Doppler-EUS: Sen 41% and 0% respectively | 0 |
| Hocke et al[ | R | 125 | Differential diagnosis between non-neoplastic cysts and PCNs. Hyperenhancement: 100% PCNs Hypoenhancement: 94% non-neoplastic cysts (PCs and dysontogenic cysts) CH-EUS superior to EUS in differential diagnosis between PCNs and non-neoplastic cysts (a | 0 |
| Harima et al[ | R | 30 | Performance for diagnosing mural nodules CT: Sen 71%, Spe 100%, PPV 100%, NPV 90%, A 92% EUS: Sen 72%, Spe 61%, PPV 50%, NPV 100%, A 72% CH-EUS: Sen 100%, Spe 97%, PPV 93%, NPV 100%, A 98% | 0 |
| Fujita et al[ | R | 50 | Sensitivity for diagnosing mural nodules: CT: 86% | 0 |
| Fusaroli et al[ | R | 76 | Differential diagnosis between non-neoplastic cysts and PCNs and between benign and malignant cysts. Hyperenhancement: 86% SCAs and 89% mucinous cysts ( | 0 |
| Kamata et al[ | R | 70 | Mural nodule as a sign of mucinous cyst EUS | 0 |
| Yamamoto et al[ | R | 30 | Quantitative CH-EUS in IPMNs Echo intensity change and echo intensity reduction rate, and nodule/parenchyma contrast ratio significantly higher in HGD/invasive carcinoma (e | 0 |
P: Prospective; R: Retrospective; CT: Computed tomography; MRI: Magnetic resonance imaging; EUS: Endoscopic ultrasonography; CH-EUS: Contrast harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography; Sen: Sensitivity; Spe: Specificity; PPV: Positive predictive value; NPV: Negative predictive value; A: Accuracy; PCNs: Pancreatic cystic neoplasms; IPMN: Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm; HGD: High grade dysplasia.
Figure 1Mural nodule and mucus in branch duct type intraductal pancreatic mucinous neoplasms. A: EUS B mode image. B: Contrast harmonic EUS image. Microbubbles in a mural nodule (green arrow). No bubbles in a mucus clot (orange arrow). EUS: Endoscopic ultrasonography.
Figure 2Needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy probe in a 19G needle.
Needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy in pancreatic cystic lesions
| Konda et al[ | P | 16 | 94% Technical success (feasibility study) | 12% post-procedure pancreatitis |
| Konda et al[ | P | 66 | Stage 1: Description of visualized structures ( | 3% post-procedure pancreatitis 4.5% intracystic self-limited bleeding |
| Nakai et al[ | P | 30 | Villous pattern in 18 patients with highly certain diagnosis: Sen 80%, Spe 100%, PPV 100%, NPV 80%, A 89% for mucinous cysts Significant association with mucinous cysts (b | 7% post-procedure (cystoscopy followed by nCLE) pancreatitis |
| Napoléon et al[ | P | 31 | Superficial vascular network: Sen 69%, Spe 100%, PPV 100%, NPV 82%, A 87% for SCAs | 3% post-procedure pancreatitis |
| Napoléon et al[ | R | 31 | Step 1: Description of nCLE patterns for mucinous cysts, PCs and cystic NENs with histological correlation Step 2: Retrospective external validation of nCLE criteria Accuracy 94% for mucinous cysts (90% IPMN - 90% MCA) - 87% SCA - 87% PCs Substantial global IOA: Perfect PC, almost perfect SCA, moderate IPMN, fair MCA | |
| Kadayifci et al[ | P | 20 | nCLE performance for mucinous cysts: Sen 66% -Spe 100% -A 80% | 0 complications |
| Krishna et al[ | P | 10 | Reproducibility of the | |
| Napoléon et al[ | P | 209 | Diagnostic yield 91% in 78 patients with non-communicating cysts and pathological diagnosis: Sen 95%, Spe 100% - PPV 100% - NPV 98% - A 99% for SCAs Sen 95%, Spe 100% - PPV 100% - NPV 94% - A 97% for mucinous cysts Sen 100%, Spe 95% - PPV 70% - NPV 100% - A 96% for NENs Sen 96%, Spe 95% - PPV 98% - NPV 91% - A R96% for premalignant cysts | 1.3% post-procedure pancreatitis |
| Karia et al[ | R | 15 | IOA poor to fair for all nCLE variables | |
| Krishna et al[ | R | 49 | nCLE performance on 26 patients with definitive diagnosis (23 with pathological diagnosis): Sen 94%, Spe 82% - PPV 88% - NPV 92% - A 89% for mucinous cysts IOA and IOR: Substantial for all nCLE criteria | 6.1% post-procedure pancreatitis |
| Krishna et al[ | R | 29 | nCLE performance on 29 patients with definitive diagnosis (23 with pathological diagnosis): Sen 95%, Spe 94% - A 95% for mucinous cysts Sen 99%, Spe 98% - A 98% for SCAs Sen 99%, Spe 98% - A 98% for NENs IOA and IOR: Almost perfect for mucinous cysts and SCAs |
P: Prospective; R: Retrospective; Sen: Sensitivity; Spe: Specificity; PPV: Positive predictive value; NPV: Negative predictive value; A: Accuracy; PCNs: Pancreatic cystic neoplasms; PC: Pseudocyst; MCA: Mucinous cystadenoma; SCA: Serous cystadenoma; IPMN: Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm; NENs: Neuroendocrine neoplasm; IOA: Interobserver agreement; IOR: Intraobserver reliability.
Figure 3Needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy image of an intraductal pancreatic mucinous neoplasms displaying multiple papillary projections.
Figure 4Needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy image of the superficial vascular network pattern of a serous cystadenoma. Multiple interconnected vessels (green arrows). Red cells inside displayed as black structures (orange arrow).
Figure 5Staining with a vascular marker of serous cystadenomas histological specimen. Capillary necklace with subepithelial vessels showed in brown.
Figure 6Epithelial border image in a mucinous cystadenoma at needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy.
Figure 7Heterogeneous sized grey and white particles in a pseudocyst at needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy.
Figure 8Moray forceps.
Figure 9Moray forceps inside a cyst. Green arrow: The tip of the 19G needle. Orange arrow: The tip of the Moray forceps grasping the cyst wall.
Figure 10Diagnostic algorithm integrating new endoscopic ultrasonography-based technologies. PCL: Pancreatic cystic lesión; PC: Pseudocyst; MPD: Main pancreatic cyst; BD-IPMN: Branch duct intraductal pancreatic mucinous neoplasm; MCN: Mucinous cystic neoplasm; SCA: Serous cystadenoma; NEN: Neuroendocrine tumour; CT: Computed tomography, MRI: Magnetic resonance imaging; EUS: Endoscopic ultrasonography; CH-EUS: Contrast harmonic enhanced EUS; EUS-FNA: EUS guided fine needle aspiration; nCLE: Needle-based confocal endomicroscopy.