Lower yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in patients with pancreatic head mass with a biliary stent.

BACKGROUND: In jaundiced patients with suspected pancreatic cancer, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with biliary stent is frequently performed prior to histologic diagnosis by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). AIMS: To compare the accuracy of jaundiced patients undergoing EUS-FNA for a pancreatic mass with or without a biliary stent. METHODS: Consecutive patients with a pancreatic mass and jaundice who underwent EUS-FNA between 4/2005 and 4/2013 were identified. Final diagnosis was based on histologic or radiologic evaluation with >6-month follow-up if the index EUS-FNA was negative for malignancy. Primary endpoint was histologic accuracy of EUS-FNA. RESULTS: Mean age of the 180 patients was 65 ± 12 years; 83 (46 %) had ERCP prior to EUS-FNA and 75 (42 %) received a biliary stent. Onsite cytopathologist was present for 81 (45 %) procedures. Final diagnosis revealed malignancy in 172 (96 %) patients, with adenocarcinoma in 159 (88 %). Patients with biliary stents had lower accuracy of EUS-FNA for malignancy than those without a biliary stent: 77 % (95 % CI 67-85 %) versus 89 % (95 % CI 81-93 %). On multivariate analysis, having a biliary stent (OR = 0.37, 95 % CI 0.15-0.90), onsite cytopathologist (OR = 9.24, 95 % CI 2.64-32.37), and receiving a core biopsy (OR = 2.60, 95 % CI 1.07-6.29) were associated with accuracy of EUS-FNA. CONCLUSIONS: Presence of a biliary stent was associated with a significant decrease in the accuracy of EUS-FNA for histologic diagnosis of pancreatic cancer, while accuracy was increased when a cytopathologist was onsite. EUS-FNA should be performed prior to ERCP in jaundiced patients with suspected pancreatic cancer.

Cyanoacrylate spray for treatment of difficult-to-control GI bleeding.

BACKGROUND: Although endoscopic therapy is highly effective for control of GI bleeding, a small proportion of patients experience persistent bleeding and may require radiologic or surgical intervention. Experience with cyanoacrylate spray for treatment of difficult-to-control GI bleeding is limited. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of an endoscopic cyanoacrylate spray technique for treatment of difficult-to-control GI bleeding. DESIGN: Case series. SETTING: Two tertiary-care centers. PATIENTS: This study involved consecutive patients with overt GI bleeding who were treated with n-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate spray during endoscopy for persistent bleeding despite conventional hemostatic therapies. INTERVENTION: Cyanoacrylate spray. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Hemostasis, rebleeding, adverse events, and technical failure associated with cyanoacrylate spray. RESULTS: Five patients were treated with cyanoacrylate spray during endoscopy for persistent bleeding (duodenal ulcer in 3, gastric vascular ectasia in 1, rectal postpolypectomy bleeding in 1) after failed conventional therapies. Immediate hemostasis and technical success were achieved in all patients. At a median follow-up of 42 days (range 38-120 days), 2 patients developed recurrent bleeding. One patient experienced rebleeding 2 days after the procedure, subsequently requiring radiographic intervention and surgery. Another patient had recurrent bleeding from a different bleeding source 18 days after the procedure. No adverse events attributed to the cyanoacrylate spray were observed. LIMITATIONS: Small number of patients. CONCLUSION: In patients with difficult-to-control GI bleeding failing conventional endoscopic therapies, cyanoacrylate spray was effective in achieving immediate hemostasis. Prospective studies with a larger number of patients to evaluate the role of the cyanoacrylate spray technique during endoscopy for GI bleeding are needed.