Background and Aim. A wet suction technique (“wet” technique) has been developed to improve the quality of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for sampling various solid lesions. However, no studies have reported on the wet technique for EUS-FNA for gastrointestinal (GI) subepithelial lesions (SELs). We conducted a pilot randomized crossover trial to explore whether the wet technique could be useful with regard to tissue adequacy of upper GI-SELs (UGI-SELs) compared to the conventional EUS-FNA technique (“dry” technique). Methods. Twenty-six patients with UGI-SELs indicated for EUS-FNA were randomly assigned to the dry-first arm using the dry technique for the first two passes or the wet-first arm using the wet technique for the first two passes using a cross-over design with a ratio of 1 : 1. The primary endpoint was the cellularity score of the EUS-FNA specimens rated on a 4-point scale (0-3). The secondary endpoints were the factors influencing cellularity in each suction technique. Results. The mean cellularity score was
1.65
±
1.20
for the wet technique and
2.00
±
0.98
for the dry technique (
p
=
0.068
). Logistic regression analysis showed that higher cellularity may be related to the final diagnosis of gastrointestinal stromal tumors in the dry technique and the SEL location in the upper stomach in the wet technique. Conclusion. The wet EUS-FNA technique failed to show a potential for improved cellularity of specimens compared to the dry technique for UGI-SELs.
Background
The efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade in the treatment of microsatellite instability (MSI)-high tumors was recently reported. Therefore, the acquisition of histological specimens is desired in cases of unresectable solid pancreatic lesions (UR SPLs). This study investigated the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) using a Franseen needle for UR SPL tissue acquisition and MSI evaluation.
Methods
A total of 195 SPL patients who underwent EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) or EUS-FNB (EUS-FNAB) between January 2017 and March 2020 were enrolled in this study. Among them, 89 SPL patients (FNB: 28, FNA: 61) underwent EUS-FNAB using a 22-G needle (UR SPLs: 58, FNB: 22, FNA: 36) (UR SPLs after starting MSI evaluation: 23, FNB: 9, FNA: 14).
Results
The puncture number was significantly lower with FNB than with FNA (median (range): 3 (2–5) vs 4 (1–8), P < 0.01, UR SPLs: 3 (2–5) vs 4 (1–8), P = 0.036). Histological specimen acquisition was more commonly achieved with FNB than with FNA (92.9% (26/28) vs 68.9% (42/61), P = 0.015, UR SPLs: 100% (22/22) vs 72.2% (26/36), P < 0.01). The histological specimen required for MSI evaluation was acquired more often with FNB than with FNA (88.9% (8/9) vs 35.7% (5/14), P = 0.03).
Conclusions
EUS-FNB using a Franseen needle is efficient for histological specimen acquisition and sampling the required amount of specimen for MSI evaluation in UR SPL patients.
Background
The prognosis of pancreatic cancer (PC) has been improved by new chemotherapy regimens (combination of 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and leucovorin (FOLFIRINOX) or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP)). Unfortunately, chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a common adverse event of these two regimens. The efficacy of pregabalin for CIPN has been reported in previous studies. However, the efficacy of mirogabalin for CIPN remains unknown. Thus, in this study, we aimed to clarify which drug (mirogabalin or pregabalin) was more valuable for improving CIPN.
Methods
A total of 163 PC patients who underwent FOLFIRINOX or GnP between May 2014 and January 2021 were enrolled. Among them, 34 patients were diagnosed with CIPN. Thirteen patients were treated with mirogabalin (mirogabalin group), and twenty-one patients were treated with pregabalin (pregabalin group). Treatment efficacy was compared between the two groups.
Results
In both the mirogabalin group and the pregabalin group, the grade of patients with CIPN at 2, 4, and 6 weeks after the initiation of treatment showed significant improvement compared to the pretreatment grade. Notably, the rate of CIPN improvement was higher in the mirogabalin group than in the pregabalin group (2 weeks: 84.6% (11/13) vs 33.3% (7/21), P value = 0.005; 4 weeks, 6 weeks: 92.3% (12/13) vs 33.3% (7/21), P value = 0.001).
Conclusions
Although both mirogabalin and pregabalin were effective at improving CIPN, mirogabalin might be a suitable first choice for CIPN in PC patients.
Trial registration
Not applicable
Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) has become the standard treatment for superficial esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SESCC). However, the treatment strategy for SESCC complicated by esophageal varices (EVs) has not been established. We report two cases of SESCC in patients with alcoholic cirrhosis complicated by EVs who underwent ESD. Case 1 presented with EVs on the anal side of the SESCC, and endoscopic variceal ligation (EVL) was performed before ESD. After EVL, the SESCC was successfully treated by ESD without any adverse events. Case 2 presented EVs from the anal side of the SESCC to the submucosa just below the SESCC. Then, EVL and endoscopic injection sclerotherapy with polidocanol were performed before ESD. However, ESD was not completed because of severe bleeding by uncontrolled blood flow below and around the SESCC. Bleeding during ESD was controlled in case 1, but not in case 2.
Endoscopic resection has been the standard treatment for intramucosal esophageal cancers (ECs) because of the low risk of lymph node metastases in the lesions. In recent years, endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), which can resect large ECs, has been performed. However, the risk of esophageal stricture after ESD is high when the mucosal defect caused by the treatment exceeds 3/4 of the circumference of the lumen. Despite the subsequent high risk of luminal stricture, ESD has been performed even in cases of circumferential EC. In such cases, it is necessary to take measures to prevent stricture. Therefore, in this review, we aimed to clarify the current status of stricture prevention methods after esophageal ESD based on previous literature. Although various prophylactic methods have been reported to have stricture-preventing effects, steroid injection therapy and oral steroid administration are mainstream. However, in cases of circumferential EC, both steroid injection therapy and oral steroid administration cannot effectively prevent luminal stricture. To solve this issue, clinical applications, such as tissue shielding methods with polyglycolic acid sheet, autologous oral mucosal epithelial sheet transplantation, and stent placement, have been developed. However, effective prophylaxis of post-ESD mucosal defects of the esophagus is still unclear. Therefore, further studies in this research field are needed.
The sample adequacy and diagnostic accuracy of an endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for gastric subepithelial lesions (SELs) have been reported to be imperfect. To resolve these issues, a fork-tip needle as an EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle has been developed. This study was conducted to evaluate the usefulness of a fork-tip needle in an EUS-FNB for gastric SELs. Seventy-nine patients who received an EUS-FNA or FNB using a fork-tip needle for gastric SELs were included in the study. The sample adequacy and diagnostic accuracy were compared between the EUS-FNB with the fork-tip needle group (fork-tip group, n = 13) and the EUS-FNA with FNA needle group (FNA group, n = 66). In addition, a multivariate analysis of the factors influencing diagnostic accuracy was conducted. Regarding sample adequacy, there was no significant difference between the groups (100% vs. 90.9%, respectively; p = 0.582). The diagnostic accuracy of the fork-tip group was numerically higher than that of the FNA group (92.3% vs. 81.8%, respectively; p = 0.682). In a multivariate analysis, the diagnostic accuracy was related to the tumor size and location of the SEL but not to the needle type. In conclusion, this study does not show statistical superiority, but suggests the useful potential of a fork-tip needle.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.