Efficacy and Histologic Frequencies of Endoscopic Ultrasonography-guided Tissue Acquisition Using Conventional Fine-needle Aspiration Needles for Gastric Subepithelial Hypoechoic Mass

Overview

Journal Australas J Ultrasound Med

Date 2024 May 24

PMID 38784701

Authors

Kazuya Akahoshi

Shinichi Tamura

Kazuaki Akahoshi

Yuki Shiratsuchi

Hidenobu Koga

Masafumi Oya

Yoshihiro Ohishi

Tadashi Koga

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction/purpose: For gastric subepithelial lesions (GSELs) showing a hypoechoic mass (HM) on endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) imaging, the utility of EUS-guided tissue acquisition using conventional fine-needle aspiration needles (EUS-TA-CFNAN) and the frequency of histological types remain unclear. This study aimed to examine this issue.

Methods: This prospective observational study enrolled 291 consecutive patients who underwent EUS-TA-CFNAN for GSELs showing an HM (GSELHM) on EUS imaging. Immunohistochemical analysis was performed for all EUS-TA-CFNAN and surgically resected specimens. The main outcome measures were the technical results of EUS-TA-CFNAN and the frequency of histological types in GSELHM.

Results: The endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition using conventional fine-needle aspiration needle diagnosis rate for GSELHM was 80.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 75.0-84.5, 233/291). It was significantly lower for antrum (P = 0.004) and lesions smaller than 2 cm (P = 0.003). There were no adverse events. The immunohistochemical diagnoses of EUS-TA-CFNAN included 149 cases of gastrointestinal stromal tumour (GIST) (51.2%), 48 cases of leiomyoma (16.5%), 11 cases of schwannoma (3.8%), 8 cases of the ectopic pancreas (2.7%), 5 cases of subepithelial lesion like cancer (1.7%), 12 cases of other lesions (4.1%), and 58 cases of undiagnosable lesions (19.9%). The frequency of malignant or potentially malignant tumour in GSELHM was 55.0% (95% CI: 49.1-60.8, 160/291). Surgery was performed in 149 patients according to the conclusive EUS-TA-CFNAN results, in which the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-TA-CFNAN was 97.3% (95% CI: 94.7-99.9, 145/149).

Conclusion: The use of EUS-TA-CFNAN for GSELHMs is safe and accurate. Gastric subepithelial lesions showing a hypoechoic mass have a reasonably high possibility of containing malignant or potentially malignant tumours, including GISTs.

Citing Articles

Reopenable clip over-the-line method in endoscopic full-thickness resection of gastric submucosal tumors: A historical control study.

Shichijo S, Uedo N, Mori H, Kawakami Y, Tani Y, Iwagami H DEN Open. 2025; 5(1):e70067.

PMID: 39882504 PMC: 11774660. DOI: 10.1002/deo2.70067.

EUS-guided tissue acquisition from gastric subepithelial lesions-The optimal technique still remains undecided.

Giri S, Sundaram S Australas J Ultrasound Med. 2024; 27(4):263-264.

PMID: 39734621 PMC: 11671731. DOI: 10.1002/ajum.12398.

A stab in the dark.

Whalley G Australas J Ultrasound Med. 2024; 27(2):73-74.

PMID: 38784698 PMC: 11109990. DOI: 10.1002/ajum.12391.

References

Akahoshi K, Oya M . Gastrointestinal stromal tumor of the stomach: How to manage?. World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2010; 2(8):271-7. PMC: 2998840. DOI: 10.4253/wjge.v2.i8.271. View

Attila T, Aydin O . Lesion size determines diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA with onsite cytopathologic evaluation for upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2018; 29(4):436-441. PMC: 6284628. DOI: 10.5152/tjg.2018.17876. View

Akahoshi K, Akahoshi K, Shiratsuchi Y, Tamura S, Uemura K, Sashihara R . Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration for Duodenal Subepithelial Lesions Showing a Hypoechoic Mass on Endoscopic Ultrasound Imaging. Turk J Gastroenterol. 2023; 34(11):1156-1162. PMC: 10724752. DOI: 10.5152/tjg.2023.22696. View

Lopes C, Rigon P, Zettler C, Atalibio Hartmann A . Differential diagnosis of mesenchymal neoplasms of the digestive tract by cell block and immunohistochemistry. Cytopathology. 2018; 29(6):531-536. DOI: 10.1111/cyt.12630. View

Larghi A, Fuccio L, Chiarello G, Attili F, Vanella G, Paliani G . Fine-needle tissue acquisition from subepithelial lesions using a forward-viewing linear echoendoscope. Endoscopy. 2013; 46(1):39-45. DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1344895. View

Akahoshi K, Oya M, Koga T, Shiratsuchi Y . Current clinical management of gastrointestinal stromal tumor. World J Gastroenterol. 2018; 24(26):2806-2817. PMC: 6048423. DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v24.i26.2806. View

Val-Bernal J, Yllera E, Moris M, Abdulkader Nallib I, Vazquez-Boquete A, Martino M . Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology in the diagnosis of the gastrointestinal stromal tumor of the stomach. Diagn Cytopathol. 2020; 48(9):833-839. DOI: 10.1002/dc.24442. View

Minoda Y, Chinen T, Osoegawa T, Itaba S, Haraguchi K, Akiho H . Superiority of mucosal incision-assisted biopsy over ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in diagnosing small gastric subepithelial lesions: a propensity score matching analysis. BMC Gastroenterol. 2020; 20(1):19. PMC: 6975081. DOI: 10.1186/s12876-020-1170-2. View

Hwang J, Saunders M, Rulyak S, Shaw S, Nietsch H, Kimmey M . A prospective study comparing endoscopy and EUS in the evaluation of GI subepithelial masses. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005; 62(2):202-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0016-5107(05)01567-1. View

10.

Trindade A, Benias P, Alshelleh M, Bazarbashi A, Tharian B, Inamdar S . Fine-needle biopsy is superior to fine-needle aspiration of suspected gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a large multicenter study. Endosc Int Open. 2019; 7(7):E931-E936. PMC: 6624113. DOI: 10.1055/a-0953-1640. View

11.

Akahoshi K, Oya M, Koga T, Koga H, Motomura Y, Kubokawa M . Clinical usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for gastric subepithelial lesions smaller than 2 cm. J Gastrointestin Liver Dis. 2014; 23(4):405-12. DOI: 10.15403/jgld.2014.1121.234.eug. View

12.

Mekky M, Yamao K, Sawaki A, Mizuno N, Hara K, Nafeh M . Diagnostic utility of EUS-guided FNA in patients with gastric submucosal tumors. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010; 71(6):913-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2009.11.044. View

13.

Karaca C, Turner B, Cizginer S, Forcione D, Brugge W . Accuracy of EUS in the evaluation of small gastric subepithelial lesions. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010; 71(4):722-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2009.10.019. View

14.

Deprez P, Moons L, OToole D, Gincul R, Seicean A, Pimentel-Nunes P . Endoscopic management of subepithelial lesions including neuroendocrine neoplasms: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. Endoscopy. 2022; 54(4):412-429. DOI: 10.1055/a-1751-5742. View

15.

Lv X, Wang C, Xie Y . Efficacy and safety of submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection for upper gastrointestinal submucosal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Endosc. 2016; 31(1):49-63. DOI: 10.1007/s00464-016-4978-7. View

16.

Casali P, Blay J, Abecassis N, Bajpai J, Bauer S, Biagini R . Gastrointestinal stromal tumours: ESMO-EURACAN-GENTURIS Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2021; 33(1):20-33. DOI: 10.1016/j.annonc.2021.09.005. View

17.

Faulx A, Kothari S, Acosta R, Agrawal D, Bruining D, Chandrasekhara V . The role of endoscopy in subepithelial lesions of the GI tract. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017; 85(6):1117-1132. DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2017.02.022. View

18.

Dalal I, Andalib I . Advances in endoscopic resection: a review of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), endoscopic full thickness resection (EFTR) and submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection (STER). Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022; 7:19. PMC: 9081920. DOI: 10.21037/tgh-2020-10. View

19.

Takasumi M, Hikichi T, Hashimoto M, Nakamura J, Kato T, Kobashi R . Usefulness of a Fork-Tip Needle in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy for Gastric Subepithelial Lesions. Diagnostics (Basel). 2021; 11(10). PMC: 8534775. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11101883. View

20.

Nathan N, Narayan E, Smith M, Horn M . Cell block cytology. Improved preparation and its efficacy in diagnostic cytology. Am J Clin Pathol. 2000; 114(4):599-606. DOI: 10.1309/G035-P2MM-D1TM-T5QE. View