Fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic cystic lesions: a randomized study with long-term follow-up comparing standard and flexible needles

Abstract

Background Pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) are increasingly found on cross-sectional imaging, with the majority having a low risk for malignancy. The added value of fine-needle aspiration (FNA) in risk stratification remains unclear. We evaluated the impact of three FNA needles on diagnostic accuracy, clinical management, and the ability to accrue fluid for tumor markers.

Methods A multicenter prospective trial randomized 250 patients with PCLs ≥ 13 mm 2:1:1 to 19G Flex, 19G, and 22G needles with crossover for repeated FNA procedures. Diagnostic accuracy was established at 2-year follow-up, with the final diagnosis from surgical histopathology or consensus diagnosis by experts based sequentially on clinical presentation, imaging, and aspirate analysis in blinded review.

Results Enrolled patients (36 % symptomatic) had PCLs in the head (44 %), body (28 %), and tail (26 %). Percentage of cyst volume aspirated was 78 % (72 % – 84 %) for 19G Flex, 74 % (64 % – 84 %) for 22G, and 73 % (63 % – 83 %) for 19G (P = 0.84). Successful FNA was significantly higher for 19G Flex (89 % [82 % – 94 %]) and 22G (82 % [70 % – 90 %]) compared with 19G (75 % [63 % – 85 %]) (P = 0.02). Repeated FNA was required more frequently in head/uncinate lesions than in body and tail (P < 0.01). Diagnostic accuracy of the cyst aspirate was 84 % (73 % – 91 %) against histopathology at 2-year follow-up (n = 79), and 77 % (70 % – 83 %) against consensus diagnosis among nonsurgical cases (n = 171). Related serious adverse events occurred in 1.2 % (0.2 % – 3.5 %) of patients.

Conclusions Our study results demonstrate a statistically significant difference among the three needles in the overall success rate for aspiration, but not in the percentage of cyst volume aspirated. Flexible needles may be particularly valuable in sampling cystic PCLs in the pancreatic head/uncinate process.

^* Equal first authors

Publication History

Received: 31 July 2020

Accepted: 16 November 2020

Accepted Manuscript online:
16 November 2020

Article published online:
04 February 2021

• References

• 1 Vege SS, Ziring B, Jain R. et al. American Gastroenterological Association Institute guideline on the diagnosis and management of asymptomatic neoplastic pancreatic cysts. Gastroenterology 2015; 148: 819-822
• 2 Tanaka M, Fernandez-Del Castillo C, Kamisawa T. et al. Revisions of international consensus Fukuoka guidelines for the management of IPMN of the pancreas. Pancreatology 2017; 17: 738-753
• 3 Zhu H, Jiang F, Zhu J. et al. Assessment of morbidity and mortality associated with endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for pancreatic cystic lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig Endosc 2017; 29: 667-675
• 4 Tanaka M, Fernandez-del Castillo C, Adsay V. et al. International consensus guidelines 2012 for the management of IPMN and MCN of the pancreas. Pancreatology 2012; 12: 183-197
• 5 Cotton PB, Eisen GM, Aabakken L. et al. A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: report of an ASGE workshop. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 71: 446-454
• 6 Guidelines onMedical Devices. Clinical evaluation: a guide for manufacturers and notified bodies under directives 93/42/EEC and 90/385/EEC. In: European Commission. MEDDEV 27/1 Revision 4. 2016
• 7 International Organization for Standardization Technology Committee. Clinical investigation of medical devices for human subjects – good clinical practice. Geneva: ISO; 2011: 14155
• 8 CONSORT Transparent Reporting of Trials. Accessed 3 December 2020 http://www.consort-statement.org/
• 9 Raman MuthusamyV, Chandrasekhara V. ASGE Standards of Practice Committee. et al. The role of endoscopy in the diagnosis and treatment of cystic pancreatic neoplasms. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 84: 1-9
• 10 Al-Haddad M, Gill KR, Raimondo M. et al. Safety and efficacy of cytology brushings versus standard fine-needle aspiration in evaluating cystic pancreatic lesions: a controlled study. Endoscopy 2010; 42: 127-132
• 11 Mittal C, Obuch JC, Hammad H. et al. Technical feasibility, diagnostic yield, and safety of micro forceps biopsies during EUS evaluation of pancreatic cystic lesions (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2018; 87: 1263-1269
• 12 Huelsen A, Cooper C, Saad N. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided, through-the-needle forceps biopsy in the assessment of an incidental large pancreatic cystic lesion with prior inconclusive fine-needle aspiration. Endoscopy 2017; 49: E109-E110
• 13 Attili F, Pagliari D, Rimbas M. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided histological diagnosis of a mucinous non-neoplastic pancreatic cyst using a specially designed through-the-needle microforceps. Endoscopy 2016; 48 (Suppl. 01) E188-E189
• 14 Konda VJ, Meining A, Jamil LH. et al. A pilot study of in vivo identification of pancreatic cystic neoplasms with needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy under endosonographic guidance. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 1006-1013
• 15 Konda VJ, Aslanian HR, Wallace MB. et al. First assessment of needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy during EUS-FNA procedures of the pancreas (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74: 1049-1060
• 16 Majumder S, Taylor WR, Yab TC. et al. Novel methylated DNA markers discriminate advanced neoplasia in pancreatic cysts: marker discovery, tissue validation, and cyst fluid testing. Am J Gastroenterol 2019; 114: 1539-1549
• 17 Attili F, Fabbri C, Yasuda I. et al. Low diagnostic yield of transduodenal endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy using the 19-gauge Flex needle: A large multicenter prospective study. Endosc Ultrasound 2017; 6: 402-408
• 18 Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer Statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J Clin 2017; 67: 7-30
• 19 Moris M, Bridges MD, Pooley RA. et al. Association between advances in high-resolution cross-section imaging technologies and increase in prevalence of pancreatic cysts from 2005 to 2014. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 14: 585-593 e583
• 20 Moris M, Raimondo M, Woodward TA. et al. Risk factors for malignant progression of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms. Dig Liver Dis 2015; 47: 495-501
• 21 Elta GH, Enestvedt BK, Sauer BG. et al. ACG Clinical Guideline: diagnosis and management of pancreatic cysts. Am J Gastroenterol 2018; 113: 464-479
• 22 Fábrega-Foster K, Kamel IR. Expert Panel on Gastrointestinal Imaging. et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Pancreatic Cyst. J Am Coll Radiol 2020; 17: S198-S206
• 23 Sighinolfi M, Quan SY, Lee Y. et al. Fukuoka and AGA criteria have superior diagnostic accuracy for advanced cystic neoplasms than Sendai criteria. Dig Dis Sci 2017; 62: 626-632
• 24 Lekkerkerker SJ, Besselink MG, Busch OR. et al. Comparing 3 guidelines on the management of surgically removed pancreatic cysts with regard to pathological outcome. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 85: 1025-1031
• 25 Brugge WR, Lewandrowski K, Lee-Lewandrowski E. et al. Diagnosis of pancreatic cystic neoplasms: a report of the cooperative pancreatic cyst study. Gastroenterology 2004; 126: 1330-1336
• 26 Khalid A, Zahid M, Finkelstein SD. et al. Pancreatic cyst fluid DNA analysis in evaluating pancreatic cysts: a report of the PANDA study. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 1095-1102
• 27 Singhi AD, McGrath K, Brand RE. et al. Preoperative next-generation sequencing of pancreatic cyst fluid is highly accurate in cyst classification and detection of advanced neoplasia. Gut 2018; 67: 2131-2141
• 28 Das KK, Geng X, Brown JW. et al. Cross validation of the monoclonal antibody Das-1 in identification of high-risk mucinous pancreatic cystic lesions. Gastroenterology 2019; 157: 720-730 e722
• 29 Del Chiaro M, Verbeke C, Salvia R. et al. European experts consensus statement on cystic tumours of the pancreas. Dig Liver Dis 2013; 45: 703-711