PEUS-FNA is safe and effective for the investigation of pelvic lesions. Cancer Cytopathol 2016;124:836-41. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Objective:This study aims to determine the yield of EUS in patients with common bile duct (CBD) dilation and normal liver function tests (LFTs).Materials and Methods:Between October 2000 and December 2016, all patients referred for EUS for unexplained CBD dilatation (CBD ≥7 mm), with normal aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, alkaline phosphatase, and bilirubin and no history of sphincterotomy, were eligible. Linear-array EUS was performed by one of the two experienced endosonographers. Data were extracted from a prospectively maintained database.Results:Of 29,920 upper gastrointestinal EUS procedures performed, 840/29,920 (3%) were for unexplained CBD dilation. Of 840 patients, 199 (24%) had normal LFTs, 99% were Caucasian, 46% had biliary-type abdominal pain, and 41% were postcholecystectomy. EUS diagnosed choledocholithiasis (CDL) or sludge in 18/199 (9%) patients (7/18 had CBD sludge only). No other pathology was diagnosed. Of 18 CDL patients, 15 (83%) had an intact gallbladder, and all 15 patients had cholelithiasis. The frequency of CDL or sludge in postcholecystectomy patients was only 3.7% (3/82); none of these patients were younger than 69 years of age. Regression analyses showed no associations between EUS diagnosis of CDL or sludge and biliary-type abdominal pain, other symptoms, sex, or race. Each additional year of age was associated with an increase in the risk of CDL or sludge by a factor of 1.05 (odds ratio: 1.05; P = 0.034).Summary:In patients with CBD dilation and normal LFTs, the only significant pathology identified is CBD stones or sludge (almost exclusively in elderly patients with cholelithiasis).Conclusion:EUS should be avoided in patients with dilated bile ducts and normal LFTs, especially if under 65 years of age and postcholecystectomy.

Introduction: One of the most effective diagnostic tools for pancreatic cancer is endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) or biopsy (EUS-FNB). Several randomized clinical trials have compared different EUS tissue sampling needles for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. Objective: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided FNA as EUS-FNB needles for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer using a systematic review and meta-analysis. Method: A literature review with a meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA guide. The databases of PubMed, Cochrane and Google Scholar were used, including studies published between 2011–2021 comparing the diagnostic yield (diagnostic accuracy or probability of positivity, sensitivity, specificity, predictive value) of EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy. Random effect models allowed estimation of the pooled odds ratio with a confidence interval (CI) of 95%. Results: Nine randomized control trials were selected out of 5802 articles identified. Among these, five studies found no statistically significant difference between the EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB, whereas the other four did. The meta-analysis found EUS-FNB accuracy superior to EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer with a pooled odds ratio of 1.87 (IC 95%: 1.33–2.63). Conclusion: As compared to EUS-FNA, EUS-FNB seems to improve diagnostic accuracy when applied to suspicious pancreatic lesions.

Background and Objectives: The aim of the study was to perform the first randomized trial comparing the diagnostic yield, bloodiness, and cellularity of the 25G standard needle (25S) and the 25G ProCore™ needle (25P). Materials and Methods: All patients referred to the tertiary care referral center for EUS guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of suspicious solid pancreatic lesions were eligible. EUS-FNA was performed in each lesion with both 25S and 25P needles (the choice of the first needle was randomized), using a multipass sampling pattern, without stylet or suction. Rapid on-site evaluation was used when possible. Pap-stained slides were read by a single experienced cytopathologist, blinded to the needle type. Results: One hundred and forty-three patients were recruited. Samples were positive for cancer in 122/143 (85.3%) with the 25S needle versus 126/143 (88.1%) with the 25P needle, negative in 17/143 (11.9%) with the 25S needle versus 13/143 (9.1%) with the 25P needle, and suspicious in 4/143 (2.8%) with each needle. There was no difference in any outcome based on the type of the first needle. No carryover effect was detected ( P = 0.214; NS). Cumulative logistic regression analyses showed no associations between the type of needle and diagnostic yield for cancer, cellularity, or bloodiness. The difference in the yield for cancer was 2.9% (−4.2; 10.1%); with the confidence interval upper within the predetermined noninferiority margin of 15%. Conclusion: The 25S needle is noninferior to the 25P needle for diagnosing cancer in suspicious pancreatic lesions.

A 51-year-old man presented with dyspnoea and basithoracic pain. Chest X-ray revealed bilateral pleural effusion, which was managed by bilateral chest drain placement. The pleural fluid analysis showed elevated lipase. Subsequent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) demonstrated a large fistula from the tail of the main pancreatic duct to the left pleural space. Definitive treatment was accomplished with ERCP guided large pancreatic stents placement.

No abstract

No abstract

Patient: Female, 79-year-old Final Diagnosis: Degenerated serous cystic tumor of the pancreas Symptoms: Colon polyps Medication:— Clinical Procedure: Pancreatectomy Specialty: Surgery Objective: Rare coexistence of disease or pathology Background: Serous cystic tumors of the pancreas are known to present a benign nature and course, not requiring surgery in the absence of symptoms. In rare cases, these benign tumors may present aggressive characteristics such as local infiltration and lymph node and distant metastases. In such cases, a surgical approach may be necessary. Case Report: We present the case of a 79-year-old woman with an asymptomatic cytologically suggested caudal serous cystic tumor infiltrating the spleen and the splenic vein. This tumor was discovered in a computed tomography scan in the setting of evaluating distant spreading of a primary malignant neoplasm of the rectum. Suspicious malignant signs on imaging dictated a surgical approach and a distal splenopancreatectomy was carried out in the same operative time as the transanal resection of the rectal lesion. The nature of the pancreatic neoplasm was confirmed by histology, but 2 lymph nodes out of 4 retrieved were positive. The postoperative course was uneventful. No adjuvant treatment was proposed. Imaging control 6 months after surgery was not indicative of relapse. Conclusions: Serous cystic adenomas of the pancreas, although generally considered benign neoplasms, may present with characteristics of malignancy. Moreover, they may prove difficult to differentiate from other malignant neoplasms by non-surgical modalities. Although current guidelines and data from the literature provide controversial information regarding management of these clinical entities, in the presence of suspicious radiological aspects, surgical resection could be considered.