Das, Koushik K.

ABSTRACT Background Retrospective evaluations of multidisciplinary team (MDT) review of pancreatic cystic lesions (PCL) demonstrate improved PCL management. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) evaluates PCL for worrisome features; however, its influence on MDT is unclear and may be attenuated by anchoring/confirmation bias. We aimed to evaluate the impact of EUS and the overall performance of MDT evaluation of PCL. Methods Four mock MDT sessions at two institutions were presented imaging from 40 consecutive PCL cases (20 “high‐risk” with advanced neoplasia, 20 “low‐risk” with pathologic low‐grade dysplasia or ≥ 3 years of non‐progression on surveillance), with and without upfront EUS/FNA (cytology, CEA, Amylase), in a randomized, crossover design. Group 1 adjudicated without EUS, Group 2 adjudicated with EUS, and Group 3 adjudicated with EUS after initially adjudicating without it. Results The cohort included branch‐duct ( n = 20), mixed type ( n = 6), and main duct ( n = 4) IPMN, MCN ( n = 5), and non‐mucinous PCL ( n = 5). Group 2 (EUS) correctly identified mucinous PCL with 97% sensitivity and 70% specificity, significantly higher than Group 1 (No EUS) (Sensitivity 91%, Specificity 20%; p = 0.04). Group 3 (Unblinded to EUS) performed significantly worse in mucinous PCL identification compared with Group 2, indicating cognitive bias (Sensitivity 97%, Specificity 10% ( p = 0.0003)). Group 2 correctly identified high‐risk PCL that required surgical intervention with 85% sensitivity and 85% specificity, significantly higher than Group 1 (Sensitivity 60%, Specificity 75%; p = 0.0016) and Group 3 (Sensitivity 73%, Specificity 80%, p = 0.0485). Conclusion While susceptible to cognitive bias, EUS significantly improves MDT assessment of PCL. MDT establishes a high bar for iterative additions of biomarkers to PCL analysis.

Multidisciplinary case conferences have been shown to improve patient outcomes. However, such case conferences may be unavailable in some settings. This multidisciplinary discussion of 4 challenging hepatobiliary cases was presented at the 2023 Society of Advanced Body Imaging Annual Meeting in Dallas, TX. The cases include an “imaging occult” pancreatic tumor, a large pancreatic mass, an intraductal biliary mass, and a polypoid intraluminal gallbladder mass.

AbstractBackground and AimTumor genotyping may allow for improved prognostication and targeted therapy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We aimed to compare endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) with fine needle aspiration (FNA) to fine needle biopsy (FNB) for obtaining sufficient tissue for genomic analysis and theranostic potential.MethodsA retrospective cohort study of patients that underwent EUS‐FNA or EUS‐FNB with either positive or suspicious cytology for PDAC between March 2016 and December 2017. Demographic, procedural, and cytology data were recorded. Genetic alterations were recorded, and Kaplan–Meier survival curves were calculated.ResultsThe study included 167 patients: 145 patients had FNA and 22 patients underwent FNB. Overall, 117 samples (70.1%) were sufficient for targeted next‐generation sequencing. FNB resulted in a higher proportion of patients with sufficient samples compared with FNA (90.9% vs 66.9%; P = 0.02). In multivariable modeling, only FNB (odds ratio 4.95, 95% confidence interval 1.11–22.05, P = 0.04) was associated with sufficient sampling for genomic testing. FNB was more likely to obtain sufficient tissue from tumors ≤ 3 cm (100% vs 68.4%, P = 0.017) and tumors located in the head/neck of the pancreas (100% vs 63.1%, P = 0.03) compared with FNA. The most commonly identified alterations were in KRAS (88%), TP53 (68%), and SMAD4 (16%).ConclusionsEndoscopic ultrasonography can reliably obtain sufficient tissue from PDAC for targeted genomic sequencing for prognostication and theranostics. FNB should be considered when tumor genotyping is requested, especially for tumors ≤ 3 cm or tumors located in the head/neck of the pancreas.