Levy, Michael J.

Abstract Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has evolved from a purely diagnostic procedure to one with therapeutic capabilities. One of the most challenging therapeutic intervention for endosonographers is EUS‐guided pancreatic drainage. The development of this technique has allowed access and drainage of the main pancreatic duct after failed endoscopic retrograde pancreatography and can avoid invasive procedures such as surgical and percutaneous interventions. This review discusses the indications, technique, challenges, and an algorithmic approach to EUS‐guided pancreatic drainage.

Acute hemorrhage related to gastric varices (GV) is more severe and often more difficult to immediately treat upon detection, leading to a poorer patient prognosis, as compared to esophageal variceal bleeding. Currently, the recommended treatment of bleeding GV is endoscopic cyanoacrylate injection and transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement for endoscopic failures. Newer endoscopic (e.g. hemospray) and endosonographic (e.g. coil injection, glue obliteration, or combined coil and glue injection) techniques have been developed to offer an alternative treatment and improve patient outcome. The present article serves to review the endoscopic, endosonographic, and interventional radiological techniques used to treat GV and their clinical applications.

BACKGROUNDMultigene molecular testing to guide personalized therapy for oncology patients is of increasing clinical relevance. Molecular testing of fine‐needle aspiration samples is underused, but when acquired with minimally invasive techniques could become the standard of care to obtain theranostic specimens. The aims of the current study were to identify key cytology specimen selection criteria suitable for next‐generation sequencing (NGS) and to determine the prevalence and spectrum of pathogenic alterations in a cohort of patients with AJCC stage IV lung cancer.METHODSA total of 70 adrenal gland cytology specimens with direct smears were screened to identify 56 patients with a single slide containing at least 300 total cells and 20% tumor nuclei. After DNA extraction, the NGS protocols were used to simultaneously detect mutations in >2800 exonic regions in 50 key cancer genes.RESULTSA total of 28 specimens produced acceptable NGS results. Specimens with a combined critical cell mass (>5000 viable cells) and a DNA concentration >5 ng/µL resulted in a 95% chance of successful sequencing. A total of 37 pathogenic alterations were identified in 10 genes and in 25 patients (85%). A pathogenic alteration (≥1) linked to available or developing targeted therapies was revealed in 50% of cases.CONCLUSIONSThe data from the current study demonstrate that theranostic NGS can be applied to adrenal gland metastasis using routine cytologic smear specimens. The characteristics of such smears could be evaluated during onsite adequacy assessment by cytopathology professionals. This model greatly augments the opportunity for customized genotype‐directed therapy from minimally invasive techniques. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2014;122:822–832. © 2014 American Cancer Society.

Background and Aims . EUS-FNA is an accurate and safe technique to biopsy mediastinal lymph nodes. However, there are few data pertaining to the role of EUS-FNA to biopsy central lung masses. The aim of the study was to assess the diagnostic yield and safety of EUS-FNA of indeterminate central mediastinal lung masses. Methods . Design: Retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database; noncomparative. Setting: Tertiary referral center. From 10/2004 to 12/2010, all patients with a lung mass located within proximity to the esophagus were referred for EUS-FNA. Main Outcome Measurement: EUS-FNA diagnostic accuracy and safety. Results . 73 consecutive patients were included. EUS allowed detection in 62 (85%) patients with lack of visualization prohibiting FNA in 11 patients. Among sampled lesions, one patient (1/62 = 1.6%) had a benign lung mass (hamartoma), while the remaining 61 patients (61/62 = 98.4%) had a malignant mass (primary lung cancer: 55/61 = 90%; lung metastasis: 6/61 = 10%). The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of EUS-FNA were 96.7%, 100%, and 96.7%, respectively. The sensitivity was 80.8% when considering nonvisualized masses. One patient developed a pneumothorax (1/62 = 1.6%). Conclusions . EUS-FNA appears to be an accurate and safe technique for tissue diagnosis of central mediastinal lung masses.

Background Screening individuals at increased risk for pancreatic cancer (PC) detects early, potentially curable, pancreatic neoplasia. Objective To develop consortium statements on screening, surveillance and management of high-risk individuals with an inherited predisposition to PC. Methods A 49-expert multidisciplinary international consortium met to discuss pancreatic screening and vote on statements. Consensus was considered reached if ≥75% agreed or disagreed. Results There was excellent agreement that, to be successful, a screening programme should detect and treat T1N0M0 margin-negative PC and high-grade dysplastic precursor lesions (pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia and intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm). It was agreed that the following were candidates for screening: first-degree relatives (FDRs) of patients with PC from a familial PC kindred with at least two affected FDRs; patients with Peutz–Jeghers syndrome; and p16 , BRCA 2 and hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC) mutation carriers with ≥1 affected FDR. Consensus was not reached for the age to initiate screening or stop surveillance. It was agreed that initial screening should include endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and/or MRI/magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography not CT or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. There was no consensus on the need for EUS fine-needle aspiration to evaluate cysts. There was disagreement on optimal screening modalities and intervals for follow-up imaging. When surgery is recommended it should be performed at a high-volume centre. There was great disagreement as to which screening abnormalities were of sufficient concern to for surgery to be recommended. Conclusions Screening is recommended for high-risk individuals, but more evidence is needed, particularly for how to manage patients with detected lesions. Screening and subsequent management should take place at high-volume centres with multidisciplinary teams, preferably within research protocols.