Ken Kamata1, Reiko Ashida2, Satoru Yasukawa3, Yasutaka Chiba4, Nobuyasu Fukutake5, Hiroko Nebiki6, Akira Kurita7, Makoto Takaoka8, Takeshi Ogura9, Hideyuki Shiomi10, Masanori Asada11, Hiroaki Yasuda12, Minoru Shigekawa13, Akio Yanagisawa14, Masatoshi Kudo15, Masayuki Kitano16. 1. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Japan. Electronic address: ky11@leto.eonet.ne.jp. 2. Departments of Cancer Survey and Gastrointestinal Oncology, Osaka International Cancer Institute, Japan. 3. Department of Surgical Pathology, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan; Department of Diagnostic Pathology, Japanese Red Cross Kyoto Daini Hospital, Japan. 4. Clinical Research Center, Kindai University Hospital, Japan. 5. Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology, Osaka International Cancer Institute, Japan. 6. Department of Gastroenterology, Osaka City General Hospital, Japan. 7. Department of Gastroenterology, Kitano Hospital, Tazuke Kofukai Medical Research Institute, Japan. 8. Third Department of Internal Medicine, Kansai Medical University, Japan. 9. Second Department of Internal Medicine, Osaka Medical College, Japan. 10. Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, Kobe University, Japan. 11. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Japanese Red Cross Osaka Hospital, Japan. 12. Department of Medicine, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Japan. 13. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Japan. 14. Department of Surgical Pathology, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan; Department of Diagnostic Pathology, Japanese Red Cross Kyoto Daiichi Hospital, Japan. 15. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kindai University Faculty of Medicine, Japan. 16. Second Department of Internal Medicine, Wakayama Medical University School of Medicine, Japan.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Preoperative grading of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNET) is challenging. The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the use of a 25-gauge needle with a core trap for diagnosis and grading of PanNET. METHODS: This multicenter prospective trial was registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN000021409). Consecutive patients with suspected PanNET between June 2016 and November 2017 were enrolled. All patients underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) using a 25-gauge needle with a core trap. Samples obtained after the first needle pass were used for central pathological review. EUS-FNB was evaluated in terms of (i) technical success rate, (ii) adequacy for histological evaluation, (iii) complication rate during the procedure, and (iv) concordance between PanNET grading on EUS-FNB and that after analysis of the resected tumor. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients were enrolled. Of the 36/52 patients who underwent surgical resection, 31 were finally diagnosed with PanNET and were eligible for analysis. The technical success rate of EUS-FNB was 100%. The rate of adequacy for histological evaluation was 90.3%. There were no complications related to EUS-FNB. The concordance rate between PanNET grading on EUS-FNB and that after analysis of the resected tumor was 82.6% (95% confidence interval = 61.22-95.05, P = 0.579). CONCLUSIONS: EUS-FNB using a 25-gauge needle with a core trap is feasible, providing histological samples are of sufficient quality for diagnosis and grading of PanNET.
OBJECTIVES: Preoperative grading of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNET) is challenging. The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the use of a 25-gauge needle with a core trap for diagnosis and grading of PanNET. METHODS: This multicenter prospective trial was registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN000021409). Consecutive patients with suspected PanNET between June 2016 and November 2017 were enrolled. All patients underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) using a 25-gauge needle with a core trap. Samples obtained after the first needle pass were used for central pathological review. EUS-FNB was evaluated in terms of (i) technical success rate, (ii) adequacy for histological evaluation, (iii) complication rate during the procedure, and (iv) concordance between PanNET grading on EUS-FNB and that after analysis of the resected tumor. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients were enrolled. Of the 36/52 patients who underwent surgical resection, 31 were finally diagnosed with PanNET and were eligible for analysis. The technical success rate of EUS-FNB was 100%. The rate of adequacy for histological evaluation was 90.3%. There were no complications related to EUS-FNB. The concordance rate between PanNET grading on EUS-FNB and that after analysis of the resected tumor was 82.6% (95% confidence interval = 61.22-95.05, P = 0.579). CONCLUSIONS: EUS-FNB using a 25-gauge needle with a core trap is feasible, providing histological samples are of sufficient quality for diagnosis and grading of PanNET.
Authors: Alexander Appelstrand; Fredrik Bergstedt; Anna-Karin Elf; Henrik Fagman; Per Hedenström Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-04-08 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Giuseppe Iabichino; Milena Di Leo; Monica Arena; Giovanni Giuseppe Rubis Passoni; Elisabetta Morandi; Francesca Turpini; Paolo Viaggi; Carmelo Luigiano; Luca De Luca Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2022-09-14 Impact factor: 5.374