Search

Background In the absence of rapid on‐side pathological evaluation, endoscopy staff generally “smears” endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration (EUS‐FNA) specimens on a glass slide. As this technique is vulnerable to preparation artifacts, we assessed if its quality could be improved through a smear‐preparation‐training for endoscopy staff. Methods In this prospective pilot study, 10 endosonographers and 12 endoscopy nurses from seven regional EUS‐centers in the Netherlands were invited to participate in a EUS‐FNA smear‐preparation‐training. Subsequently, post training slides derived from solid pancreatic lesions were compared to pre‐training “control” slides. Primary outcome was to assess if the training positively affects smear quality and, consequently, diagnostic accuracy of EUS‐FNA of solid pancreatic lesions. Results Participants collected and prepared 71 cases, mostly pancreatic head lesions (48%). Sixty‐eight controls were selected from the pretraining period. The presence of artifacts was comparable for smears performed before and after training (76% vs 82%, P = .36). Likewise, smear cellularity (≥50% target cells) before and after training did not differ (44% (30/68) vs 49% (35/71), P = .48). Similar, no difference in diagnostic accuracy for malignancy was detected (P = .10). Conclusion In this pilot EUS‐FNA smear‐preparation‐training for endoscopy personnel, smear quality and diagnostic accuracy were not improved after the training. Based on these results, we plan to further study other training programs and possibilities.

Background and study aims The traditional “smear technique” for processing and assessing endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is sensitive to artifacts. Processing and evaluation of specimens collected in a liquid medium, liquid-based cytology (LBC) may be a solution. We compared the diagnostic value of EUS-FNA smears to LBC in pancreatic solid lesions in the absence of rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE). Patients and methods Consecutive patients who required EUS-FNA of a solid pancreatic lesion were included in seven hospitals in the Netherlands and followed for at least 12 months. Specimens from the first pass were split into two smears and a vial for LBC (using ThinPrep and/or Cell block). Smear and LBC were compared in terms of diagnostic accuracy for malignancy, sample quality, and diagnostic agreement between three cytopathologists. Results Diagnostic accuracy for malignancy was higher for LBC (82 % (58/71)) than for smear (66 % (47/71), P = 0.04), but did not differ when smears were compared to ThinPrep (71 % (30/42), P = 0.56) or Cell block (62 % (39/63), P = 0.61) individually. Artifacts were less often present in ThinPrep (57 % (24/42), P = 0.02) or Cell block samples (40 % (25/63), P Conclusion After a single pass, LBC provides higher diagnostic accuracy than the conventional smear technique for EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic lesions in the absence of ROSE. Therefore, LBC, may be an alternative to the conventional smear technique, especially in centers lacking ROSE.

Background: Preoperative placement of self-expanding metal stents is used in patients with obstructing colon carcinoma to prevent an emergency operation. The perceived benefits remain the subject of discussion. The data-evaluating function and complications of stents in relation to radiological position are limited. Methods: Patients receiving a preoperative stent between 2003 and 2013 were retrospectively analysed in this single-centre study. We analysed radiological deployment, eccentricity and angulation of the stent directly after placement. Endpoints were clinical success (resolution of ileus), complications needing non-elective surgery (blow-out, perforation, persistent ileus, dislocation) and other complications (bleeding, infiltrate). Associations were corrected for other potential influences. Results: Eighty-two patients were included. In 22 patients (26.8%), the stent was placed proximal to the splenic flexure. Clinical success was present in 85.4%. Twenty-two patients (26.8%) had a complication of which 16 (19.5%) underwent urgent surgery for insufficient functioning of the stent; there were two blow-outs (2.4%). A more symmetrically placed stent was associated with clinical success (p = 0.042), with large overlap between groups. However, no association was found with non-elective surgery or complications. Also, angulation and deployment were unassociated with these outcomes. Conclusions: We could not establish an association between symmetry, angulation or deployment of self-expandable colonic stents with clinical success and complications.