This is one of a series of statements discussing the use of GI endoscopy in common clinical situations. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) prepared this text

No abstract

No abstract

Objective A meta-analysis has not been previously performed to evaluate critically the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of solely pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and address factors that have an impact on variability of accuracy. The aim of this study was to determine whether the presence of a cytopathologist, variability of the reference standard and other sources of heterogeneity significantly impacts diagnostic accuracy. Methods We conducted a comprehensive search to identify studies, in which the pooled sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios for a positive or negative test (LR+, LR−) and summary receiver-operating curves (SROC) could be determined for EUS-FNA of the pancreas for ductal adenocarcinoma using clinical follow-up, and/or surgical biopsy or excision as the reference standard. Results We included 34 distinct studies (3644 patients) in which EUS-FNA for a solid pancreatic mass was evaluated. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for EUS-FNA for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma was 88.6% [95% confidence interval (CI): 87.2–89.9] and 99.3% (95% CI: 98.7–99.7), respectively. The LR+ and LR− were 33.46 (95% CI: 20.76–53.91) and 0.11 (95% CI: 0.08–0.16), respectively. The meta-regression model showed rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) (P = 0.001) remained a significant determinant of EUS-FNA accuracy after correcting for study population number and reference standard. Conclusion EUS-FNA is an effective modality for diagnosing pancreatic ductal adencarcinoma in solid pancreatic lesions, with an increased diagnostic accuracy when using on-site cytopathology evaluation.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided FNA is an excellent diagnostic tool to detect the correct etiology for solid pancreatic masses. When available, EUS-FNA should be strongly considered as the first diagnostic tool for sampling these lesions to optimize patient management.

EUS-FNA is highly accurate in identifying patients with suspected pancreatic cancer, especially when other modalities have failed. Major complications after EUS-FNA are rare, and minor complications are similar to those reported for upper endoscopy. It seems that follow-up at 1 wk might capture all of the adverse events related to EUS-FNA.

No abstract

No abstract