Digital Pathology, Endoscopic Ultrasound, Pancreas Adenocarcinoma
Conditions
Brief summary
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided (EUS) tissue acquisition is the current standard of care for the diagnosis of pancreatic solid lesions but it is burdened by a non-negligible risk of non-diagnostic or inconclusive results. Ex-vivo fluorescence confocal laser microscopy (FCM) with MAVIG VivaScope® 2500M-G4 could allow real time assessment of adequacy and diagnosis of the sample.
Detailed description
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided (EUS) tissue acquisition is the current standard of care for the diagnosis of pancreatic solid lesions. However, EUS-sampling is burdened by a non-negligible risk of non-diagnostic or inconclusive results, with an estimated negative predictive value not higher than 70-80%. ROSE could improve the diagnostic yeld of this procedure. Data about the utility of rapid on-site evalutation (ROSE) are still controversial. Without ROSE, current guidelines suggest performance of three to four needle passes with an fine needle aspiration (FNA) needle or two to three passes with a fine needle biopsy (FNB) needle. Potential drawbacks of ROSE are the considerable time commitment, costs and logistical and personnel issues that arise because of the on demand nature of these procedures with the need to have available technologists. Ex-vivo fluorescence confocal laser microscopy (FCM) is an optical technology for rapid microscopic digital imaging of fresh unfixed biological specimens without any slide preparation. FCM involves no damage or cell/tissue loss during the examination and the sample can subsequently be recovered and formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded (FFPE) for permanent histology. FCM allows both cellular and architectural details to be visualized, similar to standard histological analysis of paraffin-embedded or frozen samples. With FCM, multimodal confocal microscopy using different laser sources and fusion images can generate optical plans similar to those from hematoxylin/eosin (H&E)- stained sections directly from native tissues. Recently, the feasibility of FCM with MAVIG VivaScope® 2500M-G4 in EUS-FNB sample of pancreatic solid lesions has been investigated . This previous single-center study demonstrated good concordance between the FCM image-based evaluation and the final FFPE histology. However in this first study, a single type of FNB needle was used for all the procedures and the pathologist involved was expert in digital pathology and in pancreatic disease. Therefore it might be not representative of the everyday clinical practice. In addition the first study was mainly focused on the adequacy assessment of the samples.
Interventions
PROCEDUREEndoscopic ultrasound fine needle biopsy
EUS FNA/B for solid pancreatic lesions. After the FNA/FNB, the needle was removed from the EUS endoscope and the specimen obtained after the first needle pass was expelled and placed directly in a dedicated scaffold (Cytomatrix, UCS Diagnostics). a drop of ethanol was put on it and the liquid was drained away thanks to the porous structure of the matrix. This step was followed by the deposition of a drop of acridine-orange for 20 and a rapid washing with buffered saline. After that, the Cytomatrix was put on a dedicated microscopic slide and covered with a second slide before the introduction in the slot of the machine. The FCM VivaScope® 2500 (2500M-G4; VivaScope, Munich, Germany) was used for immediate imaging.
Sponsors
Campus Bio-Medico University
Study design
Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 90 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* pancreatic solid lesions
Exclusion criteria
* cystic lesions * not suitable acoustic window for needle biopsy * decline to give informed consent.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Diagnostic accuracy | baseline | To evaluate the accuracy of fluorescence confocal microscopy (FCM) for ex-vivo examination of samples obtained from EUS- FNA/B in pancreatic solid lesions to assess final diagnosis against final histological diagnosis. |
Countries
Italy
Outcome results
None listed