RESUMEN
Background and Objectives: Pancreatic EUS-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) is increasingly used. Accuracy of EUS-FNB, particularly for benign diseases, utility of additional EUS-FNB if malignancy is suspected but initial diagnosis is inconclusive, and complication rate are not fully elucidated. We evaluated operating characteristics of EUS-FNB overall and for different diagnostic categories, value of additional EUS-FNB if malignancy is suspected but initial diagnosis is inconclusive, and frequency and type of complications. Methods: A retrospective tertiary single-center study including 852 consecutive pancreatic SharkCore EUS-FNBs from 723 patients between 2015 and 2020. EUS-FNB diagnoses were applied according to Papanicolaou Society's system and each category was further subcategorized. Results: Sufficient tissue cylinders for a histologic diagnosis were obtained in 93.4% (796/852). Accuracy was overall, for malignant, and benign entities 85.6% (confidence interval [CI]: 83.2%-87.9%), 88.3% (CI: 85.9%-90.4%), and 94% (CI: 92.2%-95.5%). Sensitivity and accuracy of EUS-FNB for autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) (n = 15) was 83.3% (CI: 58.6%-96.4%) and 99.2% (CI: 98.3%-99.7%). Of patients in whom malignancy was suspected but initial EUS-FNB diagnosis was inconclusive, 7.3% (53/723) underwent one or two additional EUS-FNBs, and in 54.7% (29/53) of these, a malignant diagnosis was established. The frequency of hospitalization following EUS-FNB was 4.7%, with 0.2% (n = 2) incidents needing active intervention. Conclusions: We found a high accuracy of pancreatic EUS-FNB across all diagnostic categories including rare entities, such as AIP. In patients with a clinical suspicion of malignancy, additional EUS-FNB resulted in a conclusive diagnosis in more than half of cases. Complications necessitate hospitalization in almost 5%, but the majority are self-limiting.
RESUMEN
Morphology plays an important role in the distinction of autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) from pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, we aimed to determine the utility of immunohistochemical tumor markers to contribute in the distinction of these entities. In surgical specimens with AIP (n = 20), PDAC (n = 20) and normal pancreas (n = 20), the expression of pVHL, maspin, IMP3, S100P and Ki67 was examined. We evaluated intralobular reactive ducts / acinoductal metaplasia (ILDs) and extralobular ducts (ELDs) in AIP, neoplastic glands in PDAC, and ductal epithelium in the normal pancreas, using a five-tiered scoring system. The Ki67 hot spot index (Ki67-HSPI) was determined manually and using automated digital imaging analysis of virtual double stains of Ki67 and CK8. Besides, sequential dual-immunohistochemical staining of maspin/pVHL, maspin/IMP3 and Ki67/maspin was performed in a subset of the specimens. Strong overexpression of IMP3, maspin, S100P and Ki67 and loss of pVHL was observed in PDAC compared to AIP and normal pancreas. In AIP however, focal and weak aberrant expression was observed with the following proportions in ILDs/ELDs: pVHL in 45 %/85 %, maspin in 30 %/70 %, IMP3 in 55 %/5%, S100P in 10 %/35 % and Ki67-HSPI >20 % in 15 %/70 %. At least two markers were aberrantly expressed in ILDs/ELDs in 45 %/60 %. The aberrant expression was more pronounced in type 2 AIP compared to type 1. In conclusion, our data indicate that pVHL, maspin, IMP3, S100P and Ki67 can be focal and weak aberrantly expressed in AIP. However, when used as a panel, these markers seem to be useful for the differentiation of AIP from PC.
