Somatic Mutational Analysis in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Assessing Yield and Impact.

INTRODUCTION: We sought to determine the yield of somatic mutational analysis from endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biopsies of pancreatic adenocarcinoma compared with that of surgical resection and to assess the impact of these results on oncologic treatment. METHODS: We determined the yield of EUS sampling and surgical resection. We evaluated the potential impact of mutational analysis by identifying actionable mutations and its direct impact by reviewing actual treatment decisions. RESULTS: Yield of EUS sampling was 89.5%, comparable with the 95.8% yield of surgical resection. More than a quarter in the EUS cohort carried actionable mutations, and of these, more than 1 in 6 had treatment impacted by mutational analysis. DISCUSSION: EUS sampling is nearly always adequate for somatic testing and may have substantial potential and real impact on treatment decisions.

Standardization of EUS imaging and reporting in high-risk individuals of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: consensus statement of the Pancreatic Cancer Early Detection Consortium.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is an aggressive disease most often diagnosed after local progression or metastatic dissemination, precluding resection and resulting in a high mortality rate. For individuals with elevated personal risk of the development of pancreatic cancer, EUS is a frequently used advanced imaging and diagnostic modality. However, variability in the expertise and definition of EUS findings exists among gastroenterologists, as well as a lack of standardized reporting of relevant findings at the time of examination. Adoption of standardized EUS reporting, using a universally accepted and agreed on terminology, is needed. METHODS: A consensus statement designed to create a standardized reporting template was authored by a multidisciplinary group of experts in pancreatic diseases that includes gastroenterologists, radiologists, surgeons, oncologists, and geneticists. This statement was developed using a modified Delphi process as part of the Pancreatic Cancer Early Detection Consortium, and >75% agreement was required to reach consensus. RESULTS: We identified reporting elements and present standardized reporting templates for EUS indications, procedural data, EUS image capture, and descriptors of findings, tissue sampling, and postprocedural assessment of adequacy. CONCLUSIONS: Adoption of this standardized EUS reporting template should improve consistency in clinical decision-making for individuals with elevated risk of pancreatic cancer by providing complete and accurate reporting of pancreatic abnormalities. Standardization will also help to facilitate research and clinical trial design by using clearly defined and consistent imaging descriptions, thus allowing for comparison of results across different centers.

Sublingual hyoscyamine spray as premedication for colonoscopy: a randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Colonic motility and spasm during colonoscopy may affect duration and quality of the examination as well as patient comfort during and after the procedure. Previous studies assessing the utility of antispasmodic agents in colonoscopy demonstrated conflicting results. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of sublingual hyoscyamine spray (IB-Stat, Inkine Pharmaceutical) on the performance of colonoscopy. METHODS: One hundred patients undergoing elective colonoscopy were randomized in a double-blind study to receive .25 mg sublingual hyoscyamine spray (n = 50: 25 men and 25 women, mean age 60) or placebo spray (n = 50: 23 men and 27 women, mean age 56) 15 to 30 minutes before the procedure. Parameters measured included time required to reach the cecum, total procedure time, endoscopist perception of colonic motility and difficulty of the procedure, and patient assessment of discomfort after the procedure. The latter parameters were measured using a 100-mm visual analog scale. A single endoscopist performed all of the procedures. RESULTS: After adjustment for age, procedural difficulty scores and colonic motility scores were significantly lower in the hyoscyamine group compared with placebo (differences of 5.589 mm [P = .047] and 5.685 mm [P = .040], respectively). Mean time to cecal intubation and percentage of patients with discomfort were slightly lower in the hyoscyamine group (5.68 minutes/48%) compared with placebo (5.92 minutes/57.1%), although the differences were not statistically significant (P = .57 and P = .36, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Procedural difficulty and colonic motility scores were significantly lower in subjects who received sublingual hyoscyamine before colonoscopy.

Patient preference and recall of results of EUS-guided FNA.

BACKGROUND: There are no clear guidelines regarding the best way, in terms of timing and setting, to deliver results to patients who undergo EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) of suspected pancreatic masses. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to study (1) whether patients undergoing EUS-FNA prefer to receive preliminary results immediately after the procedure or at a later date, after final results are known; and (2) to assess the accuracy of patients' recollection of information given to them regarding their FNA diagnosis. DESIGN: We enrolled patients presenting to our endoscopy center for EUS-FNA of suspected pancreatic masses and obtained data through 4 pilot surveys. SETTINGS: University-based endoscopy center. PATIENTS: Sixty patients who were referred for EUS-FNA of suspected pancreatic masses. RESULTS: A total of 57 of 59 patients (96.6%) wanted preliminary results the same day as the procedure. Twenty-eight of 60 (42.7%) knew they were having a biopsy, and 42 of 60 (70%) knew cancer was suspected. Of those who received preliminary results, 31 of 41 (75%) remembered the diagnosis correctly the next day, and 32 of 38 (84%) remembered the diagnosis correctly 1 week later. LIMITATIONS: Single-center pilot study. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of our patients wished to receive preliminary results the same day as the procedure. Although most patients remembered results correctly, 25% of patients did not remember the correct diagnosis the next day. Further work is needed to improve patient's understanding of the reasons for the EUS-FNA and recall of preliminary EUS-FNA results.

Wire-guided pancreatic pseudocyst drainage by using a modified needle knife and therapeutic echoendoscope.

BACKGROUND: Various methods to drain pancreatic pseudocysts by using EUS guidance have been reported in the literature. OBJECTIVE: A new drainage technique is described that uses a modified needle knife advanced over a guidewire positioned in the pseudocyst by EUS guidance. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: Academic medical center. PATIENTS: Consecutive subjects from December 1, 2002, to January 10, 2005, with symptomatic pseudocysts in whom EUS-guided drainage was attempted. INTERVENTIONS: By using a therapeutic linear echoendoscope, a 19-gauge aspiration needle was inserted into the pseudocyst. A guidewire was placed through the needle, and a needle knife with the cutting wire protruding and bent was advanced over the guidewire to contact the stomach mucosa. The needle knife was then advanced by using electrocautery into the pseudocyst. The cystenterostomy was dilated by using a balloon over the guidewire. One to 4 stents were placed through the tract. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Successful pseudocyst drainage. RESULTS: A total of 21 of 23 patients underwent technically successful pseudocyst drainage. One patient had self-limited hypotension during the procedure. Another patient had free intraperitoneal air after the procedure but correct stent placement. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective analysis, small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: In this preliminary experience, wire-guided pseudocyst drainage with a modified needle knife appears effective and safe while allowing for a more controlled pseudocyst puncture.