Prospective Study Assessing Impact of Ethylene Oxide Sterilization on Endoscopic Ultrasound Image Quality.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Duodenoscope-associated transmission of infections has raised questions about efficacy of endoscope reprocessing using high-level disinfection (HLD). Although ethylene oxide (ETO) gas sterilization is effective in eradicating microbes, the impact of ETO on endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) imaging equipment remains unknown. In this study, we aimed to compare the changes in EUS image quality associated with HLD vs HLD followed by ETO sterilization. METHODS: Four new EUS instruments were assigned to 2 groups: Group 1 (HLD) and Group 2 (HLD + ETO). The echoendoscopes were assessed at baseline, monthly for 6 months, and once every 3 to 4 months thereafter, for a total of 12 time points. At each time point, review of EUS video and still image quality was performed by an expert panel of reviewers along with phantom-based objective testing. Linear mixed effects models were used to assess whether the modality of reprocessing impacted image and video quality. RESULTS: For clinical testing, mixed linear models showed minimal quantitative differences in linear analog score (P = .04; estimated change, 3.12; scale, 0-100) and overall image quality value (P = .007; estimated change, -0.12; scale, 1-5) favoring ETO but not for rank value (P = .06). On phantom testing, maximum depth of penetration was lower for ETO endoscopes (P < .001; change in depth, 0.49 cm). CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective study, expert review and phantom-based testing demonstrated minimal differences in image quality between echoendoscopes reprocessed using HLD vs ETO + HLD over 2 years of clinical use. Further studies are warranted to assess the long-term clinical impact of these findings. In the interim, these results support use of ETO sterilization of EUS instruments if deemed clinically necessary.

Detection of peritoneal carcinomatosis by EUS fine-needle aspiration: impact on staging and resectability (with videos).

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) greatly affects cancer staging and resectability. OBJECTIVE: To compare the PC detection rate by using EUS and noninvasive imaging and to determine the impact on staging and resectability. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Single tertiary-care referral center. PATIENTS: A prospectively maintained EUS database was reviewed to identify patients who underwent EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) of a peritoneal anomaly. Findings were compared with a strict criterion standard that incorporated cytohistologic, radiologic, and clinical data. INTERVENTION: EUS-FNA of a peritoneal anomaly. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Safety and diagnostic yield. RESULTS: Of 106 patients, a criterion standard was available in 98 (39 female patients; median age, 65 years). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of EUS-FNA versus CT/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was 91% versus 28%, 100% versus 85%, and 94% versus 47%, respectively. In newly diagnosed cancer patients, peritoneal FNA upstaged 17 patients (23.6%). Of 32 patients deemed resectable by pre-EUS CT/MRI, 15 (46.9%) were deemed unresectable based solely on peritoneal FNA. The odds of FNA changing the resectability status remained highly significant after adjustment for cancer type, time between CT/MRI and EUS-FNA, and the quality of CT/MRI. The malignant appearance of the peritoneal anomaly but not the presence of ascites on EUS predicted a positive FNA finding (odds ratio 2.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.23-5.4 and odds ratio 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.4-1.8, respectively). There were 3 adverse events among 4 patients. Two of the patients developed abdominal pain and one each hypertensive urgency and pancreatitis. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective design, single-center, bias toward EUS as a diagnostic test. CONCLUSION: Peritoneal EUS-FNA appears to safely detect radiographically occult PC and improve cancer staging and patient care.

Impact of celiac neurolysis on survival in patients with pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer (PC) often produces pain that is difficult to control. Celiac neurolysis (CN) is performed with the goal of improving pain control and quality of life while reducing opioid-related side effects. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate whether CN provides a survival advantage for PC patients. DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study. SETTING: Single tertiary-care referral center. PATIENTS: Review of a prospectively maintained database identified patients with unresectable PC who underwent CN over a 12-year period. Each patient was matched to 2 control patients with unresectable PC. INTERVENTION: CN, which included both celiac plexus neurolysis (CPN) and celiac ganglia neurolysis (CGN). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Median survival in Kaplan-Meier curves and hazard ratios. RESULTS: A total of 417 patients underwent CN and were compared with 840 controls with PC. Baseline characteristics were similar except the CN group had greater weight loss and pain requiring opioids. A mean of 16.6 ± 5.8 mL of alcohol was administered. For patients who underwent CN, the median survival from the time of presentation was shorter compared with controls (193 vs 246 days; hazard ratio 1.32; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-1.54). There was no difference in survival with unilateral or bilateral injection. However, EUS-guided CN was associated with longer survival compared with non-EUS approaches, and those who received CPN had longer survival compared with CGN. LIMITATIONS: Single center, retrospective. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that CN is an independent predictor of shortened survival in PC patients. A prospective study is needed to verify the findings and determine whether shortened survival results from CN or from other features such as performance status and tumor-related characteristics. It is also imperative to verify our finding that EUS-guided CN provides a survival advantage over other approaches and whether CPN prolongs survival compared with CGN.

EUS-derived criteria for distinguishing benign from malignant metastatic solid hepatic masses.

BACKGROUND: Detection of hepatic metastases during EUS is an important component of tumor staging. OBJECTIVE: To describe our experience with EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) of solid hepatic masses and derive and validate criteria to help distinguish between benign and malignant hepatic masses. DESIGN: Retrospective study, survey. SETTING: Single, tertiary-care referral center. PATIENTS: Medical records were reviewed for all patients undergoing EUS-FNA of solid hepatic masses over a 12-year period. INTERVENTIONS: EUS-FNA of solid hepatic masses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Masses were deemed benign or malignant according to predetermined criteria. EUS images from 200 patients were used to create derivation and validation cohorts of 100 cases each, matched by cytopathologic diagnosis. Ten expert endosonographers blindly rated 15 initial endosonographic features of each of the 100 images in the derivation cohort. These data were used to derive an EUS scoring system that was then validated by using the validation cohort by the expert endosonographer with the highest diagnostic accuracy. RESULTS: A total of 332 patients underwent EUS-FNA of a hepatic mass. Interobserver agreement regarding the initial endosonographic features among the expert endosonographers was fair to moderate, with a mean diagnostic accuracy of 73% (standard deviation 5.6). A scoring system incorporating 7 EUS features was developed to distinguish benign from malignant hepatic masses by using the derivation cohort with an area under the receiver operating curve (AUC) of 0.92; when applied to the validation cohort, performance was similar (AUC 0.86). The combined positive predictive value of both cohorts was 88%. LIMITATIONS: Single center, retrospective, only one expert endosonographer deriving and validating the EUS criteria. CONCLUSION: An EUS scoring system was developed that helps distinguish benign from malignant hepatic masses. Further study is required to determine the impact of these EUS criteria among endosonographers of all experience.

Prospective evaluation of adverse events following lower gastrointestinal tract EUS FNA.

OBJECTIVES: There are virtually no data concerning the risk of adverse events (AEs) following lower gastrointestinal (LGI) endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). Our aim was to determine the incidence and factors associated with AEs following LGI EUS fine needle aspiration (FNA). METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study at a tertiary referral center. Five hundred and sixty-three patients underwent LGI EUS FNA between 1 January 2004 and 1 January 2012. We analyzed the 502 patients who had complete follow-up. AE severity was graded (1-5) utilizing Common Terminology Criteria or Visual Analog Scale. AEs were assessed during the procedures, in clinical follow-up, during phone interviews conducted at 7-14 days, and final clinical and/or phone interviews at 2-4 months. RESULTS: AEs developed in 103 (20.5%) patients and were classified as grade 1, 2, 3, or 4 in 34 (6.8%), 41 (8.2%), 23 (4.6%), and 5 (1.0%) patients, respectively. Bleeding and pain were the commonest AEs. No deaths occurred. On multivariate analysis, AEs were associated with prior pain (odds ratio (OR): 3.83, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.35-6.25), FNA from a site other than a lymph node (LN) or gut wall (OR: 2.26, 95% CI: 1.10-4.70), and malignant FNA cytology (OR: 1.80, 95% CI: 1.10-2.97); serious (grade 3-4) AEs were associated with prior pain (OR: 15.21, 95% CI: 5.04-45.85) and FNA from a site other than a LN or gut wall (OR: 3.25, 95% CI: 1.15-9.20). CONCLUSIONS: LGI EUS FNA is associated with a high rate of serious grades 3-4 AEs. This may reflect the total number of associated interventions and the frequency of underlying pathology and symptoms.

False positive endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration cytology: incidence and risk factors.

OBJECTIVE: It is broadly accepted that the false positive (FP) rate for endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration (EUS FNA) is 0-1%. It was hypothesised that the FP and false suspicious (FS) rates for EUS FNA are greater than reported. A study was undertaken to establish the rate and root cause of discordant interpretation. DESIGN: Using a prospectively maintained endoscopic database, cytohistological discordant EUS FNA examinations from 30 July 1996 to 31 December 2008 were identified retrospectively. SETTING: Tertiary referral centre. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Discordant FNA was defined by positive or suspicious FNA cytology in the absence of malignancy or neoplasm in the subsequent surgical pathology specimen, specifically in the absence of neoadjuvant therapy. Three cytopathologists conducted a blinded review of randomised discordant and matched specimens. RESULTS: FNA was performed in 5667/18 066 (31.4%) patients undergoing EUS, of whom 2547 had cytology results interpreted as 'positive' or 'suspicious' or 'atypical' for malignancy or neoplasm. Subsequent surgical resection without prior neoadjuvant therapy was performed in 377 patients with positive or suspicious cytology. The FP rate was 20/377 (5.3%) and increased to 27/377 (7.2%) when FS cases were included. The incidence of discordance was consistent over time (1996-2002: 10/118 (8.6%) vs 2003-2008: 17/259 (6.6%); p=0.5) and was higher in non-pancreatic FNA (15%) than pancreatic FNA (2.2%; p=0.0001). Two-thirds of the non-pancreatic FP cases involved sampling of perioesophageal or perirectal nodes in patients with luminal neoplasms or Barrett's oesophagus. Following pathological re-review, discordance was attributed to translocated cell contamination/sampling error (50%) or cytopathologist interpretive error (50%). CONCLUSIONS: These findings refute the accepted paradigm that FP cytology rarely occurs with EUS FNA. Further investigation revealed that FP FNA developed secondary to endosonographer technique or initial cytological misinterpretation, and is particularly likely when perioesophageal or perirectal nodes are aspirated in the setting of a luminal neoplasm or Barrett's oesophagus. Further study is needed to determine the significance of these findings and potential impact on the performance of FNA and patient outcomes.

Prospective cytological assessment of gastrointestinal luminal fluid acquired during EUS: a potential source of false-positive FNA and needle tract seeding.

OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) fine needle aspiration (FNA) can result in false-positive cytology and can also cause needle tract seeding. Our goal was to evaluate a potential cause, namely, the presence of malignant cells within gastrointestinal (GI) luminal fluid, either as a result of tumor sloughing from luminal cancers or secondary to FNA of extraluminal sites. METHODS: During EUS, luminal fluid that is usually aspirated through the echoendoscope suction channel and discarded was instead submitted for cytological analysis among patients with cancer and benign disease. Pre- and post-FNA luminal fluid samples were collected to discern the role of FNA in inducing a positive cytology. When not performing FNA, one sample was collected for the entire examination. The final diagnosis was based on strict clinicopathological criteria and >or=2-year follow-up. This study was conducted in a tertiary referral center. RESULTS: We assessed the prevalence of luminal fluid-positive cytology among patients with luminal (e.g., esophageal), extraluminal (e.g., pancreatic), and benign disease. Among the 140 patients prospectively enrolled with sufficient sampling and follow-up, an examination of luminal fluid cytology showed positive results for malignancy in luminal and extraluminal cancer patients, 48 and 10%, respectively. This included 8 out of 23 esophageal, 4 of 5 gastric, and 9 of 15 rectal cancers. The positive luminal fluid cytology rate with luminal cancers was not affected by performing FNA. Post-FNA luminal fluid cytology was positive in 3 out of 26 with pancreatic cancers. Cytological examination of luminal fluid aspirates did not demonstrate malignant cells in any patient with nonmalignant disease. CONCLUSIONS: Malignant cells are commonly present in the GI luminal fluid of patients with luminal cancers and can also be found in patients with pancreatic cancer after EUS FNA. Further study is needed to determine the impact of these findings on cytological interpretation, staging, risk of needle tract seeding, and patient care and outcomes.

Adequacy of endoscopic ultrasound core needle biopsy specimen of nonmalignant hepatic parenchymal disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The adequacy and diagnostic yield of hepatic parenchymal disease Trucut biopsy have not been determined. Therefore, our aim was to determine the adequacy of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided Trucut liver biopsy for histopathologic evaluation to include the number of complete portal tracts contained per millimeter of acquired tissue. METHODS: A single institution retrospective review was made of 9 prospectively identified patients who underwent a transgastric left liver lobe EUS-guided Trucut biopsy during a 36-month period. RESULTS: Adequate diagnostic material, to include complete portal tract number evaluation (median, 7) and connective tissue staining, was acquired to establish a histopathologic diagnosis in all 9 cases. Sixty-three complete portal tracts were established, resulting in 0.4 portal tracts per millimeter of tissue acquired. Findings established by EUS Trucut left liver lobe biopsy included mild steatosis (n = 4), cryptogenic cirrhosis (n = 2), chronic ductopenic biliary tract disease (n = 1), portal fibrosis with ductular proliferation (n = 1), and alcoholic cirrhosis with hemosiderosis (n = 1). CONCLUSIONS: EUS-guided Trucut left liver lobe biopsy yields suitable aggregate tissue for diagnostic purposes to establish the presence of chronic liver disease.

Prospective evaluation of advanced molecular markers and imaging techniques in patients with indeterminate bile duct strictures.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Standard techniques for evaluating bile duct strictures have poor sensitivity for detection of malignancy. Newer imaging modalities, such as intraductal ultrasound (IDUS), and advanced cytologic techniques, such as digital image analysis (DIA) and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), identify chromosomal abnormalities, and may improve sensitivity while maintaining high specificity. Our aim was to prospectively evaluate the accuracy of these techniques in patients with indeterminate biliary strictures. METHODS: Cholangiography, routine cytology (RC), intraductal biopsy, DIA, FISH, and IDUS were performed in 86 patients with indeterminate biliary strictures. Patients were stratified based on the presence or absence of primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC). RESULTS: RC provided low sensitivity (7-33%) but high specificity (95-100%) for PSC and non-PSC patients. The composite DIA/FISH results (when considering trisomy-7 [Tri-7] as a marker of benign disease) yielded a 100% specificity and increased sensitivity one- to fivefold in PSC patients versus RC, and two- to fivefold in patients without PSC, depending on how suspicious cytology results were interpreted. For the most difficult-to-manage patients with negative cytology and histology who were later proven to have malignancy (N = 21), DIA, FISH, composite DIA/FISH, and IDUS were able to predict malignant diagnoses in 14%, 62%, 67%, and 86%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: DIA, FISH, and IDUS enhance the accuracy of standard techniques in evaluation of indeterminate bile duct strictures, allowing diagnosis of malignancy in a substantial number of patients with false-negative cytology and histology. These findings support the routine use of these newer diagnostic modalities in patients with indeterminate biliary strictures.

Secondary linitis plastica of the rectum: EUS features and tissue diagnosis (with video).

BACKGROUND: Luminal metastases to the GI tract may be seen at the time of the primary diagnosis or may represent evidence of a distant recurrence. OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of rectal-wall metastases in patients undergoing an EUS and to describe the EUS features and yield of EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) and Trucut biopsy (TCB). DESIGN: A case series. SETTING: A single tertiary-referral center. PATIENTS: Patients undergoing lower GI (LGI) EUS from July 1, 2005, to October 31, 2007. INTERVENTION: EUS-FNA and/or TCB. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: EUS features and cytologic and/or histologic confirmation of secondary rectal linitis plastica. RESULTS: Over the 28-month period, an LGI-EUS was performed in 598 patients with presumed primary rectal cancer, of whom 6 (1%) were diagnosed with rectal-wall metastases. The EUS features were that of diffuse, circumferential, hypoechoic wall-thickening that mimics that of linitis plastica, breaching the muscularis propria in all cases. EUS-FNA and/or TCB of the rectal wall or perirectal lymph node established a diagnosis in all cases. The primary cancers originated from the bladder (n = 3), breast (n = 1), stomach (n = 1), and a right forearm cutaneous melanoma (n = 1). The time interval from the initial primary cancer diagnosis to that of GI-tract rectal metastasis ranged from 0 days (simultaneous diagnoses) to 119 months (mean +/- SD 49 +/- 43 months). LIMITATIONS: Although firm EUS criteria of rectal-wall metastases cannot be established based on 6 patients alone, certain features may prove useful for the diagnosis in the clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: EUS-FNA and/or TCB can confirm the diagnosis of secondary linitis plastica of the rectum.

Prospective study of bacteremia and complications With EUS FNA of rectal and perirectal lesions.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Recent studies showed that endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is a low-risk procedure for causing bacteremia and infectious complications when sampling solid lesions of the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract. As a result, antibiotics are not recommended for prophylaxis against endocarditis. Our aim was to prospectively evaluate the risk of bacteremia and other infectious complications in patients undergoing EUS FNA of lower GI tract lesions. METHODS: Patients referred for EUS FNA of lower GI tract lesions were considered for enrollment. Patients were excluded if there was an indication for preprocedure antibiotic administration based on American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines, had taken antibiotics within the prior 7 days, or if they had a cystic lesion. Blood cultures were obtained immediately before the procedure, after flexible sigmoidoscopy/radial EUS, and 15 minutes after EUS FNA. RESULTS: One hundred patients underwent a total of 471 FNAs (mean, 4.7 FNAs/patient; range, 1-10 FNAs/patient). Blood cultures were positive in 6 patients. Cultures from 4 patients (4.0%, 95% confidence interval, 1.6%-9.8%) grew coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (n = 2), Peptostreptococcus stomatis (n = 1), or Moraxella (n = 1), which were considered contaminants. Two patients (2.0%, 95% confidence interval, 0.6%-7%) developed bacteremia: Bacteroides fragilis (n = 1) and Gemella morbillorum (n = 1). No signs or symptoms of infection developed in any patient. CONCLUSIONS: EUS FNA of solid lesions in the lower GI tract should be considered a low-risk procedure for infectious complications that does not warrant prophylactic administration of antibiotics for the prevention of bacterial endocarditis.

Current procedural terminology, Resource-based Relative Value Scale, and the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services: overview.

Coding and payment methodology for physician professional services has been standardized through the introduction of the Current Procedural Terminology, which is maintained by the American Medical Association. The codes contained within this dataset are used by health care professionals to describe their services to payers. Inherent in the development of the procedural codes, the Resource Based Relative Value Scale Update Committee recommends physician work relative value units and practice expense and professional liability inputs to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services. This article provides an overview of the processes in place that permit regular updates in physician payment continually to be updated.

Frequently asked coding questions.

Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) coding is not an exact science. Although the CPT code set was developed to describe clearly and comprehensively services provided by health care professionals, the intended application of individual codes is not always clear. In addition, coding that may be correct in terms of CPT definitions and instructions may contradict instructions from payment policies set by insurers. This article provides answers to the gastroenterologists' most commonly asked questions and provides primary sources for coding and payment policies when possible. Answers to the questions are accurate as of the date of publication but may be subject to change.

Rodent endosonography to monitor esophageal cancer.

Animal models of luminal cancers are important to understand and assess chemopreventive and chemotherapeutic interventions. However, the ability to assess tumor growth and response without animal sacrifice is limited. We assessed the ability of luminal sonography to assess the presence of tumor and its size in a surgical esophagojejunostomy model of esophageal cancer. Luminal sonography had a sensitivity of 88%, specificity of 100%, and accuracy of 93% in identifying the esophageal cancers. The tumor dimensions on luminal sonography were within 11% of autopsy measurements. Minimal tumor dimension was 2 mm and maximum 6.2 mm. The procedure was feasible without technical difficulty. In conclusion, rodent endosonography is a useful technique that can accurately determine the presence of tumors as well as their dimensions.

Comparison of positron emission tomography, computed tomography, and endoscopic ultrasound in the initial staging of patients with esophageal cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Improvement in esophageal cancer staging is needed. Positron emission tomography (PET), computed tomography (CT), and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in the staging of esophageal carcinoma were compared. METHODS: PET, CT, and EUS were performed and interpreted prospectively in 75 patients with newly diagnosed esophageal cancer. Either tissue confirmation or fine needle aspiration (FNA) was used as the gold standard of disease. Sensitivity and specificity for tumor, nodal, and metastatic (TNM) disease for each test were determined. TNM categorizations from each test were used to assign patients to subgroups corresponding to the three treatment plans that patients could theoretically receive, and these were then compared. RESULTS: Local tumor staging (T) was done correctly by CT and PET in 42% and by EUS in 71% of patients (P value > 0.14). The sensitivity and specificity for nodal involvement (N) by modality were 84% and 67% for CT, 86% and 67% for EUS, and 82% and 60% for PET (P value > 0.38). The sensitivity and specificity for distant metastasis were 81% and 82% for CT, 73% and 86% for EUS, and 81% and 91% for PET (P value > 0.25). Treatment assignment was done correctly by CT in 65%, by EUS in 75%, and by PET in 70% of patients (P value > 0.34). CONCLUSIONS: EUS had superior T staging ability over PET and CT in our study group. The tests showed similar performance in nodal staging and there was a trend toward improved distant disease staging with CT or PET over EUS. Assignment to treatment groups in relation to TNM staging tended to be better by EUS. Each test contributed unique patient staging information on an individual basis.

Pancreatic neoplasms.

Patients who present with signs and symptoms suggesting a pancreatic neoplasm typically undergo initial imaging with transabdominal ultrasound or CT. When a pancreatic mass or fullness is identified, it may represent an inflammatory mass, benign process, or malignancy. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is performed commonly to further characterize the lesion, obtain a tissue diagnosis, and for staging. This article reviews the role of EUS for the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic tumors.

Endoscopic ultrasound for luminal malignancies.

Luminal gastrointestinal (GI) tract cancers are responsible for substantial morbidity and mortality. Since the first pairing of ultrasonography with endoscopy in 1980, technologic advances and the increased availability of trained endosonographers have propelled endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) to the forefront of luminal GI cancer staging. In this article we discuss the role of EUS for evaluating luminal GI cancers.

Cost-minimization analysis of alternative diagnostic approaches in a modeled patient with non-small cell lung cancer and subcarinal lymphadenopathy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the costs of alternative diagnostic evaluations of enlarged subcarinal lymph nodes (SLNs) in modeled patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: A cost-minimization model was used to compare 5 diagnostic approaches in the evaluation of enlarged SLNs in modeled patients with NSCLC. Values for the test performance characteristics and prevalence of malignancy in patients with SLN were obtained from the medical literature. The target population was adult patients known or suspected to have NSCLC with SLNs with a short axis length of at least 10 mm on thoracic computed tomography (CT). RESULTS: The lowest-cost diagnostic work-up was by initial evaluation with endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS FNA) biopsy ($11,490 per patient) compared with mediastinoscopy (with biopsy) ($13,658), transbronchial FNA biopsy ($11,963), CT-guided FNA biopsy ($13,027), and positron emission tomography ($12,887). The results were sensitive to rate of SLN metastases and EUS FNA sensitivity. The EUS FNA biopsy remained least costly if the probability of SLN metastases exceeded 24% or EUS FNA sensitivity was higher than 76%. Primary mediastinoscopy was the most economical if not. CONCLUSIONS: Which testing strategy is least costly for SLN evaluation in a modeled patient with NSCLC may be determined by the pretest probability of nodal metastases. Use of EUS FNA biopsy minimizes the cost of diagnostic evaluation in most cases.

Endoscopic ultrasound in the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancer.

Patients with signs and symptoms suggestive of a pancreatic neoplasm typically undergo initial imaging with transabdominal ultrasound or computed tomography. This evaluation often reveals the presence of a pancreatic mass or fullness. At times, the nature of the lesion is poorly characterized, with uncertainty remaining as to whether the lesion is an inflammatory mass or a neoplasm, and if it is cystic or solid. In these circumstances, endoscopic procedures such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and/or endoscopic ultrasound may be required. These procedures offer other means of tissue sampling, disease staging, and an option for palliative therapy. In this article, we review the role of endoscopy for the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic tumors, with a particular focus on endoscopic ultrasound.