No abstract

This Guideline from the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) focuses on technical aspects of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided sampling in gastroenterologythe choice of needle, sampling technique, and specimen handling and processing -and updates the previous guideline on these topics published in 2012 [1]. The target audience for this Guideline is endoscopists who perform EUS-guided sampling. Indications, results, and clinical impact of EUS-guided sampling are addressed in a separate clinical Guideline from ESGE [2].Guideline development process ESGE commissioned this Guideline and appointed a Guideline leader (J.M.D.) who invited the listed authors to participate in the project development. The key questions were prepared by the coordinating team (M.P., J.M.D.) and then approved by the other members. The coordinating team formulated key questions and assigned them to task force subgroups (Appendix e1 and Appendix e2, available online-only).Each task force performed a systematic literature search to prepare evidence-based and well-balanced statements on their assigned key questions. The literature search was performed in Medline through PubMed to identify new publications since ABBREVIATIONS CI confidence interval ESGE European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy EUS endoscopic ultrasound FNA fine needle aspiration FNB fine needle biopsy G gauge GRADE Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation LN lymph node RCT randomized controlled trial ROSE rapid on-site cytologic evaluation RECOMMENDATIONSFor routine EUS-guided sampling of solid masses and lymph nodes (LNs) ESGE recommends 25G or 22G needles (high quality evidence, strong recommendation); fine needle aspiration (FNA) and fine needle biopsy (FNB) needles are equally recommended (high quality evidence, strong recommendation).When the primary aim of sampling is to obtain a core tissue specimen, ESGE suggests using 19G FNA or FNB needles or 22G FNB needles (low quality evidence, weak recommendation). ESGE recommends using 10-mL syringe suction for EUSguided sampling of solid masses and LNs with 25G or 22G FNA needles (high quality evidence, strong recommendation) and other types of needles (low quality evidence, weak recommendation). ESGE suggests neutralizing residual negative pressure in the needle before withdrawing the needle from the target lesion (moderate quality evidence, weak recommendation). ESGE does not recommend for or against using the needle stylet for EUS-guided sampling of solid masses and LNs with FNA needles (high quality evidence, strong recommendation) and suggests using the needle stylet for EUSguided sampling with FNB needles (low quality evidence, weak recommendation). ESGE suggests fanning the needle throughout the lesion when sampling solid masses and LNs (moderate quality evidence, weak recommendation).ESGE equally recommends EUS-guided sampling with or without on-site cytologic evaluation (moderate quality evidence, strong recommendation GuidelineThis document was downloaded for person...

IRB 00006477.

AIM:To evaluate the ability of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) elastography to distinguish benign from malignant pancreatic masses and lymph nodes. METHODS:A multicenter study was conducted and included 222 patients who underwent EUS examination with assessment of a pancreatic mass (n = 121) or lymph node (n = 101). The classification as benign or malignant, based on the real time elastography pattern, was compared with the classification based on the B-mode EUS images and with the final diagnosis obtained by EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and/or by surgical pathology. An interobserver study was performed. RESULTS:The sensitivity and specificity of EUS elastography to differentiate benign from malignant pancreatic lesions are 92.3% and 80.0%, respectively, compared to 92.3% and 68.9%, respectively, for the conventional B-mode images. The sensitivity and specificity of EUS elastography to differentiate benign from malignant lymph nodes was 91.8% and 82.5%, respectively, compared to 78.6% and 50.0%, respectively, for the B-mode images. The kappa coefficient was 0.785 for the pancreatic masses and 0.657 for the lymph nodes.CONCLUSION: EUS elastography is superior compared to conventional B-mode imaging and appears to be able to distinguish benign from malignant pancreatic masses and lymph nodes with a high sensitivity, specificity and accuracy. It might be reserved as a second line examination to help characterise pancreatic masses after negative EUS-FNA and might increase the yield of EUS-FNA for lymph nodes.

Main Recommendations 1 ESGE recommends the use of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) over percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) after failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in malignant distal biliary obstruction when local expertise is available.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 2 ESGE suggests EUS-BD with hepaticogastrostomy only for malignant inoperable hilar biliary obstruction with a dilated left hepatic duct when inadequately drained by ERCP and/or PTBD in high volume expert centers.Weak recommendation, moderate quality evidence. 3 ESGE recommends that EUS-guided pancreatic duct (PD) drainage should only be considered in symptomatic patients with an obstructed PD when retrograde endoscopic intervention fails or is not possible.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 4 ESGE recommends rendezvous EUS techniques over transmural PD drainage in patients with favorable anatomy owing to its lower rate of adverse events.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 5 ESGE recommends that, in patients at high surgical risk, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (GBD) should be favored over percutaneous gallbladder drainage where both techniques are available, owing to the lower rates of adverse events and need for re-interventions in EUS-GBD.Strong recommendation, high quality of evidence. 6 ESGE recommends EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE), in an expert setting, for malignant gastric outlet obstruction, as an alternative to enteral stenting or surgery.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 7 ESGE recommends that EUS-GE may be considered in the management of afferent loop syndrome, especially in the setting of malignancy or in poor surgical candidates. Strong recommendation, low quality evidence. 8 ESGE suggests that endoscopic ultrasound-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) can be offered, in expert centers, to patients with a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass following multidisciplinary decision-making, with the aim of overcoming the invasiveness of laparoscopy-assisted ERCP and the limitations of enteroscopy-assisted ERCP.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.

MAIN RECOMMENDATIONSFor pancreatic solid lesions, ESGE recommends performing endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling as first-line procedure when a pathological diagnosis is required. Alternatively, percutaneous sampling may be considered in metastatic disease.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.In the case of negative or inconclusive results and a high degree of suspicion of malignant disease, ESGE suggests re-evaluating the pathology slides, repeating EUS-guided sampling, or surgery.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.In patients with chronic pancreatitis associated with a pancreatic mass, EUS-guided sampling results that do not confirm cancer should be interpreted with caution.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.For pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs), ESGE recommends EUS-guided sampling for biochemical analyses plus cytopathological examination if a precise diagnosis may change patient management, except for lesions ≤ 10 mm in diameter with no high risk stigmata. If the volume of PCL aspirate is small, it is recommended that carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level determination be done as the first analysis.Strong recommendation, low quality evidence.For esophageal cancer, ESGE suggests performing EUS-guided sampling for the assessment of regional lymph nodes (LNs) in T1 (and, depending on local treatment policy, T2) adenocarcinoma and of lesions suspicious for metastasis such as distant LNs, left liver lobe lesions, and suspected peritoneal carcinomatosis.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.For lymphadenopathy of unknown origin, ESGE recommends performing EUS-guided (or alternatively endobronchial ultrasound [EBUS]-guided) sampling if the pathological result is likely to affect patient management and no superficial lymphadenopathy is easily accessible.Strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence.In the case of solid liver masses suspicious for metastasis, ESGE suggests performing EUS-guided sampling if the pathological result is likely to affect patient management, and (i) the lesion is poorly accessible/not detected at percutaneous imaging, or (ii) a sample obtained via the percutaneous route repeatedly yielded an inconclusive result.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.

No abstract

Exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI) is a condition caused by reduced or inappropriate secretion or activity of pancreatic juice and its digestive enzymes, pancreatic lipase in particular. EPI can result in clinical manifestation and biochemical alterations causing reduced quality of life and life-threating complications. EPI is common in pancreatic disorders, where it should be suspected and actively investigated, and in many extrapancreatic conditions. There are various tests available to diagnose EPI, with indirect, noninvasive ones, such as concentration of fecal elastase being more commonly employed. Administration of pancreatic enzymes replacement therapy remains the mainstay of EPI treatment. The present review article will discuss current evidence regarding the prevalence of EPI, the available tests to diagnose it and its treatment.