Search

Assessing unclear biliary strictures is challenging. We analyzed the diagnostic performance of radiology, EUS, and ERCP. All patients referred for EUS and ERCP to assess an unclear biliary stricture were prospectively included. The data from radiology, EUS, ERCP, and tissue sampling were recorded. The diagnostic modalities were analyzed separately and in combination, with a focus on PSC. Between 2013 and 2020, 78 patients were included; 31% had PSC. A cholangioscopy was not performed in this study. The final diagnosis indicated that the biliary stricture was benign in 62% of the patients and malignant in 38%. The differences among the modalities were numerical, not significant. The modalities showed an accuracy between 78 and 83% in all the patients and between 75 and 83% in the patients with PSC. The combination of radiology and EUS showed the highest sensitivity of 94% in all the patients and a sensitivity of 100% in PSC. Tissue sampling showed the highest specificity of 93% in all patients and 89% in PSC. In 22 cases with combined EUS, ERCP, and tissue sampling, the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were 82%, 70%, and 92%, respectively. Minor differences were observed between the intention-to-diagnose analysis and the per-protocol analysis. Adverse events were recorded in 4% of cases. The combination of EUS and ERCP with tissue sampling seems to be useful and safe for excluding malignancy in unclear biliary strictures. In cases with a reduced suspicion of malignancy, radiology with an EUS may be sufficient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transmural drainage using double pigtail plastic stents (DPPS) has been routine for the treatment of peripancreatic fluid collections (PFC). Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) have since their introduction been the preferred choice; however, their superiority has not been proven. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of DPPS and LAMS. Methods This was a single-center, prospective study that included consecutive patients undergoing EUS-guided drainage between January 2010 and December 2020. The primary endpoints were technical success, clinical success and adverse event rate, while the secondary endpoints included symptomatic relief, length of hospital stay, and need for adjunct drainage. A subgroup analysis of walled-off necrosis (WON) was performed. Results A total of 89 patients (median age 56 years) underwent EUS-guided transmural drainage (DPPS: n=53; LAMS: n=36) because of a pseudocyst (n=37) or a WON (n=52). Both DPPS and LAMS had a 100% technical success rate and a comparable adverse event rate (4% vs. 6%, P=0.24). An equivalent efficacy was recorded for the drainage of PFC comparing DPPS and LAMS, and no significant statistical difference was recorded in clinical success (DPPS 60% vs. LAMS 61%, P=0.94) or the need for reintervention (DPPS 11% vs. LAMS 13%, P=0.72). Conclusions In this large, prospective study of EUS-guided drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections, LAMS and DPPS showed equivalent safety, technical success, clinical success and hospital stay. Both techniques were associated with a comparable need for complementary necrosectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Insulinoma is a rare pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm with an incidence of 0.7- 4 cases per million/year. Because of its rarity, epidemiological studies on insulinoma are few and limited by small sample sizes. An increasing incidence of insulinoma has recently been suggested. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the incidence of insulinoma in the Västra Götaland Region (VGR) of Sweden. Secondary aims were to evaluate clinical characteristics, diagnostic workup, management and outcome in patients diagnosed with insulinoma. Methods Medical records were reviewed for all patients in the VGR who had received an ICD-10 diagnosis code of a benign (D13.7) and/or a malignant (C25.4) tumor in the endocrine part of the pancreas, of hypoglycemia (E.161), and/or a code of a fasting test (AB011), from 2002-2019. Results Forty-two patients with insulinoma were identified, 37 of whom (20 men) were residents in the VGR at the time of diagnosis, giving a mean annual incidence of 1.3 cases per million/year. The mean (±standard deviation) age at diagnosis was 56±18 years. Six of the 37 (16%) patients had metastatic insulinoma and 2 patients (5%) had a confirmed multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 syndrome. At preoperative workup, computed tomography and endoscopic ultrasound detected an insulinoma in 28/36 (78%) and 21/21 (100%) cases, respectively. Conclusions Insulinoma remains a rare tumor in the modern era. The recorded mean annual incidence of 1.3 cases per million/year is compatible with the reported incidence in Sweden during the 1980s. Our results do not support an increasing incidence of insulinoma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In a tertiary center setting we aimed to study the diagnostic accuracy and clinical impact of EUS-guided biopsy sampling (EUS-FNB) with a reverse bevel needle compared with that of fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in the work-up of subepithelial lesions (SEL).Methods: All patients presenting with SELs referred for EUS-guided sampling were prospectively included in 2012-2015. After randomization of the first pass modality, dual sampling with both EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA was performed in each lesion. Outcome measures in an intention-to-diagnose analysis were the diagnostic accuracy, technical failures, and adverse events. The clinical impact was measured as the performance of additional diagnostic procedures post-EUS and the rate of unwarranted resections compared with a reference cohort of SELs sampled in the same institution 2006-2011.Results: In 70 dual sampling procedures of unique lesions (size: 6-220 mm) the diagnostic sensitivity for malignancy and the overall accuracy of EUS-FNB was superior to EUS-FNA compared head-to-head (90 vs 52%, and 83 vs 49%, both p < 0.001). The adverse event rate of EUS-FNB was low (1.2%). EUS-FNB in 2012-2015 had a positive clinical impact in comparison with the reference cohort demonstrated by less cases referred for an additional diagnostic procedure, 12/83 (14%) vs 39/73 (53%), p < 0.001, and fewer unwarranted resections in cases subjected to surgery, 3/48 (6%) vs 12/35 (34%), p = 0.001.Conclusions: EUS-FNB with a reverse bevel needle is safe and superior to EUS-FNA in providing a conclusive diagnosis of subepithelial lesions. This biopsy sampling approach facilitates a rational clinical management and accurate treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]