Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy Versus Aspiration for Tissue Sampling Adequacy for Molecular Testing in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There is limited literature on sample adequacy for molecular testing in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma obtained via endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) fine-needle aspiration (FNA) versus EUS fine-needle biopsy (FNB). We aimed to compare these two modalities regarding sample adequacy for molecular and genomic sequencing. METHODS: We reviewed all patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent EUS at Saint Luke's Hospital from 2018 to 2021. The patients were categorized based on the method of EUS tissue acquisition, specifically FNA or FNB. A comprehensive evaluation was conducted for all cases by cytotechnologists. RESULTS: Out of 132 patients who underwent EUS-guided biopsies, 76 opted for FNA, 48 opted for FNB, and 8 opted for a combination of both. The average number of passes required for FNB and FNA was 2.58 ± 1.06 and 2.49 ± 1.07, respectively (p = 0.704), indicating no significant difference. Interestingly, 71.4% (35) of FNB-obtained samples were deemed adequate for molecular testing, surpassing the 32.1% (26) adequacy observed with FNA (p < 0.001). Additionally, 46.4% (26) of FNB-obtained samples were considered adequate for genomic testing, a notable improvement over the 23.8% (20) adequacy observed with FNA (p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Although the number of passes required for cytologic diagnosis did not differ significantly between EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA, the former demonstrated superiority in obtaining samples adequate for molecular testing. Tumor surface area and cellularity were crucial parameters in determining sample adequacy for molecular testing, irrespective of the chosen tissue acquisition modality.

Use of a Novel Artificial Intelligence System Leads to the Detection of Significantly Higher Number of Adenomas During Screening and Surveillance Colonoscopy: Results From a Large, Prospective, US Multicenter, Randomized Clinical Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Adenoma per colonoscopy (APC) has recently been proposed as a quality measure for colonoscopy. We evaluated the impact of a novel artificial intelligence (AI) system, compared with standard high-definition colonoscopy, for APC measurement. METHODS: This was a US-based, multicenter, prospective randomized trial examining a novel AI detection system (EW10-EC02) that enables a real-time colorectal polyp detection enabled with the colonoscope (CAD-EYE). Eligible average-risk subjects (45 years or older) undergoing screening or surveillance colonoscopy were randomized to undergo either CAD-EYE-assisted colonoscopy (CAC) or conventional colonoscopy (CC). Modified intention-to-treat analysis was performed for all patients who completed colonoscopy with the primary outcome of APC. Secondary outcomes included positive predictive value (total number of adenomas divided by total polyps removed) and adenoma detection rate. RESULTS: In modified intention-to-treat analysis, of 1,031 subjects (age: 59.1 ± 9.8 years; 49.9% male), 510 underwent CAC vs 523 underwent CC with no significant differences in age, gender, ethnicity, or colonoscopy indication between the 2 groups. CAC led to a significantly higher APC compared with CC: 0.99 ± 1.6 vs 0.85 ± 1.5, P = 0.02, incidence rate ratio 1.17 (1.03-1.33, P = 0.02) with no significant difference in the withdrawal time: 11.28 ± 4.59 minutes vs 10.8 ± 4.81 minutes; P = 0.11 between the 2 groups. Difference in positive predictive value of a polyp being an adenoma among CAC and CC was less than 10% threshold established: 48.6% vs 54%, 95% CI -9.56% to -1.48%. There were no significant differences in adenoma detection rate (46.9% vs 42.8%), advanced adenoma (6.5% vs 6.3%), sessile serrated lesion detection rate (12.9% vs 10.1%), and polyp detection rate (63.9% vs 59.3%) between the 2 groups. There was a higher polyp per colonoscopy with CAC compared with CC: 1.68 ± 2.1 vs 1.33 ± 1.8 (incidence rate ratio 1.27; 1.15-1.4; P < 0.01). DISCUSSION: Use of a novel AI detection system showed to a significantly higher number of adenomas per colonoscopy compared with conventional high-definition colonoscopy without any increase in colonoscopy withdrawal time, thus supporting the use of AI-assisted colonoscopy to improve colonoscopy quality ( ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04979962).

Challenges in Pathology Specimen Processing in the New Era of Precision Medicine.

CONTEXT.­: Precision therapies for patients with driver mutations can offer deep and durable responses that correlate with diagnosis, metastasis prognosis, and improvement in survival. The use of such targeted therapies will continue to increase, pushing us to change our traditional approaches. We needed to search for new tools to effectively integrate technological advancements into our practices because of their capability to improve the efficiency and accuracy of our diagnostic and treatment approaches. Perhaps nothing is as relevant as identifying and implementing new workflows for processing pathologic specimens and for improving communication of critical laboratory information to and from clinicians for appropriate care of patients in an efficient and timely manner. OBJECTIVES.­: To define the gold standard in delivering the best care for patients, to identify gaps in the process, and to identify potential solutions that would improve our process, including gaps related to knowledge, skills, attitudes, and practices. DESIGN.­: We assembled a multidisciplinary team to systematically perform a gap analysis study to clarify the discrepancy between the current reality in pathology specimen processing and the desired optimal situation to deliver the results intended for patient care. RESULTS.­: A practical collaborative workflow for specimen management that seeks the cooperation of stakeholders in each medical discipline to provide guidelines in specimen collection, delivery, processing, and reporting of results with the ultimate goal of improving patient outcomes is provided. CONCLUSIONS.­: New tools are required to effectively integrate data-driven approaches in specimen processing to meet the new demands.

Randomized sham-controlled trial evaluating efficacy and safety of endoscopic gastric plication for primary obesity: The ESSENTIAL trial.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate safety and efficacy of the pose™ procedure for obesity treatment. METHODS: Subjects with Class I to II obesity were randomized (2:1) to receive active or sham procedure, after each investigator performed unblinded lead-in cases. All subjects were provided low-intensity lifestyle therapy. Efficacy end points were the mean difference in percent total body weight loss (%TBWL) at 12 months between randomized groups, and responder rate achieving ≥5% TBWL. The primary safety end point was incidence of reported adverse events. RESULTS: Three hundred thirty-two subjects were randomized (active, n = 221; sham, n = 111); thirty-four subjects were included in the unblinded lead-in cohort. Twelve-month results were mean TBWL 7.0 ± 7.4% in lead-in, 4.95 ± 7.04% in active, and 1.38 ± 5.58% in sham groups, respectively. Responder rate was 41.55% in active and 22.11% in sham groups, respectively (P < 0.0001); mean responder result was 11.5% TBWL. The differences observed between active and sham groups for co-primary end points were statistically significant (P < 0.0001); however, super superiority margin as set forth in the study design was not met. No unanticipated adverse events or deaths occurred. Procedure-related serious adverse event rates were 5.0% (active) and 0.9% (sham), P = 0.068. CONCLUSIONS: The pose procedure was safe and resulted in statistically significant and clinically meaningful weight loss over sham through 1 year.

Endoscopic Therapy With Lumen-apposing Metal Stents Is Safe and Effective for Patients With Pancreatic Walled-off Necrosis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural drainage and necrosectomy have become the standard treatment for patients with pancreatic walled-off necrosis (WON). Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) have shown success in the management of pancreatic fluid collections. However, there are few data on their specific roles in management of WON. We investigated the efficacy and safety of LAMS in treatment of WON. METHODS: We performed a retrospective multicenter case series of 124 patients with WON who underwent endoscopic transmural drainage by using LAMS at 17 tertiary care centers from January 2014 through May 2015. Patients underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided cystogastrostomy or cystoenterostomy with placement of an LAMS into the WON collection. At the discretion of the endoscopist, we performed direct endoscopic necrosectomy, irrigation with hydrogen peroxide, and/or nasocystic drain placement. We performed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with pancreatic duct stent placement when indicated. Concomitant therapies included direct endoscopic debridement (n = 78), pancreatic duct stent placement for leak (n = 19), hydrogen peroxide-assisted necrosectomy (n = 38), and nasocystic irrigation (n = 22). We collected data for a median time of 4 months (range, 1-34 months) after the LAMS placement. The primary outcomes were rates of technical success (successful placement of the LAMS), clinical success (resolution of WON, on the basis of image analysis, without need for further intervention via surgery or interventional radiology), and adverse events. RESULTS: The median size of the WON was 9.5 cm (range, 4-30 cm). Eight patients had 2 LAMS placed for multiport access, all with technical success (100%). Clinical success was achieved in 107 patients (86.3%) after 3 months of follow-up. Thirteen patients required a percutaneous drain, and 3 required a surgical intervention to manage their WON. The stents remained patent in 94% of patients (117 of 124) and migrated in 5.6% of patients (7 of 124). The median number of endoscopic interventions was 2 (range, 1-9 interventions). CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of a retrospective analysis of 124 patients, endoscopic therapy of WON by using LAMS is safe and effective. Creation of a large and sustained cystogastrostomy or cystoenterostomy tract is effective in the drainage and treatment of WON.

Spiral enteroscopy: prospective U.S. multicenter study in patients with small-bowel disorders.

BACKGROUND: The performance characteristics of spiral enteroscopy have not been well-described. OBJECTIVE: To determine the technical performance, diagnostic and therapeutic yields, and safety of oral spiral enteroscopy in patients with suspected or established small-bowel pathology. DESIGN: Prospective, multicenter, cohort study, with centralized database. SETTING: Ten U.S. tertiary-care medical centers. PATIENTS: This study involved 148 participants, of whom 101 were referred for obscure bleeding. All participants referred for antegrade deep enteroscopy were considered eligible. INTERVENTION: Spiral enteroscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Examination duration, depth of insertion, spiral enteroscopy findings, mucosal assessment upon withdrawal, and patient symptom assessment (day 1 and day 7 after the procedure). RESULTS: Spiral enteroscopy was successful in 93% of patients, with a median depth of insertion beyond the angle of Treitz of 250 cm (range 10-600 cm). The mean (± standard deviation) total procedure time was 45.0 ± 16.2 minutes for all procedures, and 35.4 minutes for diagnostic procedures. The diagnostic yield was 65%, of which 48% revealed more than one abnormality. The most common findings were angiectasias (61.5%), inflammation (7.5%), and neoplasia (6.8%). Argon plasma coagulation ablation accounted for 64% of therapeutic interventions. LIMITATIONS: This was not a randomized, controlled trial of deep enteroscopy modalities. CONCLUSION: Spiral enteroscopy appears to be safe and effective for evaluation of the small bowel. The procedure duration, depth of insertion, and diagnostic and therapeutic yields compare favorably with previously published data on other deep enteroscopy techniques such as single-balloon and double-balloon enteroscopy. Comparative studies are warranted.