Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Assessment of Pancreatic Fat Strongly Correlates With Histology-Based Assessment of Pancreas Composition.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to assess the relationship between magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based estimation of pancreatic fat and histology-based measurement of pancreatic composition. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, MRI was used to noninvasively estimate pancreatic fat content in preoperative images from high-risk individuals and disease controls having normal pancreata. A deep learning algorithm was used to label 11 tissue components at micron resolution in subsequent pancreatectomy histology. A linear model was used to determine correlation between histologic tissue composition and MRI fat estimation. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients (mean age 64.0 ± 12.0 years [standard deviation], 15 women) were evaluated. The fat content measured by MRI ranged from 0% to 36.9%. Intrapancreatic histologic tissue fat content ranged from 0.8% to 38.3%. MRI pancreatic fat estimation positively correlated with microanatomical composition of fat (r = 0.90, 0.83 to 0.95], P < 0.001); as well as with pancreatic cancer precursor ( r = 0.65, P < 0.001); and collagen ( r = 0.46, P < 0.001) content, and negatively correlated with pancreatic acinar ( r = -0.85, P < 0.001) content. CONCLUSIONS: Pancreatic fat content, measurable by MRI, correlates to acinar content, stromal content (fibrosis), and presence of neoplastic precursors of cancer.

Threshold Analysis of the Cost-effectiveness of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Patients at High Risk for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: Data from the International Cancer of the Pancreas Screening Consortium studies have demonstrated that screening for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma can be effective and that surveillance improves survival in high-risk individuals. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and cross-sectional imaging are both used, although there is some suggestion that EUS is superior. Demonstration of the cost-effectiveness of screening is important to implement screening in high-risk groups. METHODS: Results from centers with EUS-predominant screening were pooled to evaluate efficacy of index EUS in screening. A decision analysis model simulated the outcome of high-risk patients who undergo screening and evaluated the parameters that would make screening cost-effective at a US $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year willingness to pay. RESULTS: One-time index EUS has a sensitivity of 71.25% and specificity of 99.82% to detection to detect high-risk lesions. Screening with index EUS was cost-effective, particularly at lifetime pancreatic cancer probabilities of greater than 10.8%, or at lower probabilities if life expectancy after resection of a lesion that was at least 16 years, and if missed, lesion rates on index EUS are 5% or less. CONCLUSIONS: Pancreatic cancer screening can be cost-effective through index EUS, particularly for those individuals at high-lifetime risk of cancer.

A comparative evaluation of EUS-guided biliary drainage and percutaneous drainage in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction and failed ERCP.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EGBD) may be a safe, alternative technique to percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in patients who fail ERCP. However, it is currently unknown how both techniques compare in terms of efficacy, safety, and cost. The aims of this study were to compare efficacy, safety, and cost of EGBD to that of PTBD. METHODS: Jaundiced patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction who underwent EGBD or PTBD after failed ERCP were included. Technical success, clinical success, and adverse events between the two groups were compared. RESULTS: A total of 73 patients with failed ERCP subsequently underwent EGBD (n = 22) or PTBD (n = 51). Although technical success was higher in the PTBD group (100 vs. 86.4 %, p = 0.007), clinical success was equivalent (92.2 vs. 86.4 %, p = 0.40). PTBD was associated with higher adverse event rate (index procedure: 39.2 vs. 18.2 %; all procedures including reinterventions: 80.4 vs. 15.7 %). Stent patency and survival were equivalent between both groups. Total charges were more than two times higher in the PTBD group (p = 0.004) mainly due to significantly higher rate of reinterventions (80.4 vs. 15.7 %, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: EGBD and PTBD are comparably effective techniques for treatment of distal malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP. However, EGBD is associated with decreased adverse events rate and is significantly less costly due to the need for fewer reinterventions. Our results suggest that EGBD should be the technique of choice for treatment of these patients at institutions with experienced interventional endosonographers.

The adoption of ablation therapy for Barrett's esophagus: a cohort study of gastroenterologists.

OBJECTIVES: Although ablation therapy may be useful in the treatment of Barrett's esophagus. evidence of effectiveness is scarce, and little is known about current utilization of ablation. We aimed to determine whether the use of ablation was increasing in a cohort of gastroenterologists, and to identify physician beliefs and characteristics associated with ablation use. METHODS: We surveyed a national sample of gastroenterologists about ablation use, with an 18-month follow-up. The self-administered instrument included questions about demographic characteristics, attitudes about ablation therapy, and prior experience with ablation. Case scenarios were also included. We used logistic regression to identify factors associated with the use of ablation in patients with Barrett's esophagus. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-nine (50.3% of those eligible) responded to the baseline survey. Few agreed that ablation lowers the risk of adenocarcinoma (15%) or is supported by the medical literature (19%). However, 25% of respondents reportedly had used ablation at baseline, and this increased to 36% in the follow-up survey (p = 0.0003). The use of ablation was significantly associated with physician age greater than 54 yr (odds ratio [OR] = 2.77, 95% CI = 1.04-7.37) and the belief that ablation was used by colleagues (OR = 13.27, 95% CI = 4.44-39.64) or decreases medical costs (OR = 5.07, 95% CI = 1.00-25.74). CONCLUSIONS: Although few gastroenterologists agreed that ablation is effective, a significant proportion had adopted its use. There was a significant increase in ablation use during our study period, and the characteristic that was most strongly associated with ablation use was the belief that colleagues used it.