Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) for focal liver lesions has gained attention as an alternative to percutaneous biopsy. Although the outcomes of EUS-TA for focal liver lesions have been reported to be favorable, no studies have focused on small focal liver lesions (≤2 cm). The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of EUS-TA for small focal liver lesions (≤2 cm).

The details of EUS-TA performed for focal liver lesions between 2016 and 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. The outcomes were compared between cases involving ≤2 cm lesions and those involving >2 cm lesions. The primary outcomes were diagnostic ability and adverse events.

EUS-TA for focal liver lesions was performed in 109 cases. Of the 109 cases, 32 (29.3%) involved ≤2 cm lesions and 77 (70.6%) involved >2 cm lesions. Right lobe lesions and transduodenal puncture were significantly fewer in the ≤2 cm group. There were no significant differences in needle gauge, needle type, or number of punctures between the groups. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy rates were 96.8%, 100%, and 96.8%, respectively, in the ≤2 cm group and 97.4%, 100%, and 97.4%, respectively, in the >2 cm group, with no significant differences between the groups. There was no difference in adverse events between the groups (0% in the ≤2 cm group and 2.3% in the >2 cm group).

EUS-TA for small focal liver lesions measuring ≤2 cm has favorable outcomes, which are similar to those for lesions measuring >2 cm.

This study aimed to investigate the usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) for diagnosing focal liver lesions in patients with a history of multiple primary malignant neoplasms.

Among patients who underwent EUS-TA for focal liver lesions between 2016 and 2022, those with a history of multiple malignant neoplasms were included. A histologically confirmed malignant tumor within the past 5 years before EUS-TA was defined as a history of malignant neoplasm. The primary outcomes were diagnostic ability and adverse events of EUS-TA.

This study included 16 patients (median age, 73 [33-90] years), the median tumor size was 32 (6-51) mm, 14 had a history of double malignant neoplasms, whereas two had triple malignant neoplasms. Malignant neoplasms were detected histologically or cytologically in all cases. Immunohistochemistry was performed in 75% (12/16), and the final diagnosis of EUS-TA was metastatic liver tumor in 12 patients, and primary malignant liver tumor in four patients. The primary site could be identified in 11 of 12 metastatic tumor cases. The diagnostic yield of EUS-TA was 100% (16/16) for differentiating benign and malignant tumors and 94% (15/16) for confirming the histological type including the primary site of metastatic lesions. No adverse events were associated with the procedure.

EUS-TA is a useful diagnostic modality for focal liver lesions in patients with a history of multiple malignant neoplasms, allowing for the differential diagnosis of primary and metastatic tumors and identification of the primary site of metastatic lesions.

Background and study aims In patients with ascites, percutaneous liver biopsy is generally contraindicated. Because endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) allows tissue sample obtention from the digestive tract lumen, a biopsy without the intervention of ascites may prevent adverse events (AEs). This study aimed to evaluate the safety of EUS-TA for focal liver lesions in the presence of ascites. Patients and methods A retrospective study was conducted using medical records of cases in which EUS-TA was performed on focal liver lesions between 2016 and 2022. Study participants were classified into two groups: those with ascites and those without it, and the outcomes were compared. The primary outcome was AEs. Results We included 109 cases of EUS-TA for focal liver lesions. Ascites was present in 20.1% of cases (22/109) and absent in 79.8% of cases (87/109). There were no significant differences between the two groups in clinical backgrounds and EUS-TA procedure, although fine-needle biopsy needles were significantly more frequently used in patients without ascites. In the ascites group, puncture without intervening ascites was successful in 90.9% of cases (20/22). The incidence of AEs was 4.5% (1/22) in the ascites group and 1.1% (1/87) in the non-ascites group, showing no significant difference. The two AEs were mild self-limiting abdominal pain. Conclusions In focal liver lesions with ascites, EUS-TA allows biopsy without the intervention of ascites in most cases. The incidence of AEs did not differ significantly between patients with and without ascites.

Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is an important diagnostic tool for suspected parenchymal lesions in the gastrointestinal tract and adjacent organs. Our study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of EUS-FNA in focal liver lesions (FLLs).

Data from 88 patients diagnosed with FLLs by imaging who underwent EUS-FNA from 1 January 2017 to 31 August 2022 were reviewed in our retrospective study at the Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University and Ruijin Hospital of the School of Medicine of Shanghai Jiao Tong University. The EUS-FNA biopsy results were compared with the final diagnosis to evaluate diagnostic value. The relevant factors were analysed to determine their influence on EUS-FNA biopsy results.

The 88 patients analysed in this study resulted in a final diagnosis of 86 malignant and two benign cases. The overall diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA in FLLs was 93.18 % (82/88; 95 % Confidence Interval [CI], 87.9-98.5), with a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 93.02 % (80/86; 95 %CI, 87.6-98.4), 100 % (2/2; 95 %CI, 100-100), 100 % (80/80; 95 %CI, 100-100), and 25 % (2/8; 95 %CI, -5-55.0), respectively. The parameters related to lesion and procedure were not significantly different between these two groups (p > 0.05). The number of puncture needles in the groups showed a statistically significant difference between multiple and single punctures (p = 0.001).

Our data revealed that EUS-FNA is a safe and reliable diagnostic method for FLLs that shows high accuracy.

Focal liver lesions (FLL) often require cytohistological evaluation. Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) is highly accurate in diagnosing pancreatic and gastrointestinal malignancies. The aim of our study was to evaluate the role of EUS-TA in the characterization of FLL.

A retrospective analysis of a prospective database of patients who underwent EUS-TA for the evaluation of FLL. Diagnostic yield, adverse events and factors associated with diagnostic yield were evaluated as endpoints. The effect of variables such as needle size, lesion size, rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) and the use of cytological or histological needles were analyzed.

A total of 114 cases were included (mean age 68.05 ± 11.35 years, 64 male). A correct diagnosis was made using EUS-TA in 100 of the 114 cases (diagnostic yield of 88%). The EUS-TA of additional extrahepatic lesions during the same EUS procedure increased the diagnostic yield to 94%. No adverse events were reported. Multivariate analysis did not identify any factor influencing the diagnostic yield.

EUS-TA is a highly accurate and safe technique for the differential diagnosis of FLL and could be considered as the primary approach in this setting.

In patients with liver tumors, the histopathology examination can assist in diagnosis, staging, prognosis, and therapeutic management strategy. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition using fine needle aspiration (FNA) or more newly fine needle biopsy (FNB) is a well-developed technique in order to evaluate and differentiate the liver masses. The goal of the EUS-FNA or EUS-FNB is to provide an accurate sample for a histopathology examination. Therefore, malignant tumors such as hepatocarcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma and liver metastasis or benign tumors such as liver adenoma, focal hyperplastic nodular tumors and cystic lesions can be accurately diagnosed using EUS-guided tissue acquisition. EUS-FNB using 19 or 22 Ga needle provide longer samples and a higher diagnostic accuracy in patients with liver masses when compared with EUS-FNA. Few data are available on the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB when compared with percutaneously, ultrasound, computer tomography or transjugulary-guided liver biopsies. This review will discuss the EUS-guided tissue acquisition options in patients with liver tumors and its efficacy and safety in providing accurate samples. The results of the last studies comparing EUS-guided liver biopsy with other conventional techniques are presented. The EUS-guided tissue acquisition using FNB can be a suitable technique in suspected liver lesions in order to provide an accurate histopathology diagnosis, especially for those who require endoscopy.

The caudate lobe of the liver is located deep within the body and surrounded by major blood vessels, such as inferior vena cava, portal vein, and hepatic veins. Thus, percutaneous biopsy is technically challenging. Herein, we report seven patients with focal liver lesions in the caudate lobe who underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA). Their median age was 56 (25-79) years, consisting five males and two females, and the median lesion size was 44 (19-77) mm. Transgastric EUS-TA was performed in all patients. The needles used were 22G and 25G in six patients and one patient, and the median procedure time was 18 (13-30) min. In all patients, adequate specimens were collected, and pathological diagnosis was possible (three intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, two metastatic tumors from pancreatic cancer, one hepatocellular carcinoma, and one focal nodular hyperplasia). No adverse events associated with the procedure were observed. EUS-TA can be the first choice for tissue acquisition of the caudate lobe lesions.

In hepatology, the clinical use of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has experienced a notable increase in recent times. These applications range from the diagnosis to the treatment of various liver diseases. Therefore, this systematic review summarizes the evidence for the diagnostic and therapeutic roles of EUS in liver diseases.

To examine and summarize the current available evidence of the possible roles of the EUS in making a suitable diagnosis in liver diseases as well as the therapeutic accuracy and efficacy.

PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases were extensively searched until October 2023. The methodological quality of the eligible articles was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale or Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. In addition, statistical analyses were performed using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software.

Overall, 45 articles on EUS were included (28 on diagnostic role and 17 on therapeutic role). Pooled analysis demonstrated that EUS diagnostic tests had an accuracy of 92.4% for focal liver lesions (FLL) and 96.6% for parenchymal liver diseases. EUS-guided liver biopsies with either fine needle aspiration or fine needle biopsy had low complication rates when sampling FLL and parenchymal liver diseases (3.1% and 8.7%, respectively). Analysis of data from four studies showed that EUS-guided liver abscess had high clinical (90.7%) and technical success (90.7%) without significant complications. Similarly, EUS-guided interventions for the treatment of gastric varices (GV) have high technical success (98%) and GV obliteration rate (84%) with few complications (15%) and rebleeding events (17%).

EUS in liver diseases is a promising technique with the potential to be considered a first-line therapeutic and diagnostic option in selected cases.

Comprehensive genomic profiling based on next-generation sequencing has recently been used to provide precision medicine for various advanced cancers. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) play essential roles in the diagnosis of abdominal masses, mainly pancreatic cancers. In recent years, CGP analysis using EUS-FNA/FNB specimens for hepatobiliary-pancreatic cancers has increased; however, the success rate of CGP analysis is not clinically satisfactory, and many issues need to be resolved to improve the success rate of CGP analysis. In this article, we review the transition from EUS-FNA to FNB, compare each test, and discuss the current status and issues in genomic analysis of hepatobiliary-pancreatic cancers using EUS-FNA/FNB specimens.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) or fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) from focal liver lesions are indicated in selected cases, but there has been no previous comparison of needle types of the same size. The aim of our study was to compare the histologic diagnostic accuracy and adequacy of cores obtained with EUS-FNB needles in contrast to those obtained with FNA needles in focal liver lesions. This prospective one-center study included patients with left lobe hepatic focal lesions with contraindications for percutaneous liver biopsy or need for EUS for concomitant lesions. Each patient had one pass of 22G EUS-FNB (Franseen) needle and one pass of 22G EUS-FNA in a crossover manner, without macroscopic on-site evaluation. Each sample was analyzed separately for histologic adequacy and diagnosis. The final diagnosis was based on histology results or on imaging follow-up in the case of negative biopsies. The EUS-FNB samples (n = 30) were found to be more adequate for histologic analysis, with more cellularity and longer tissue aggregates than the EUS-FNA samples (n = 30). The accuracy of EUS-FNB was 100%, whereas that of EUS-FNA was 86.7% (p = 0.039). No post-procedure complications were noted. The 22G EUS-FNB needle proved superior to 22G EUS-FNA in terms of tissue acquisition diagnostic accuracy and histologic adequacy in focal liver lesions.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) is an evolving technique. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the value of EUS-LB for parenchymal and focal liver lesions. Besides, we aimed to assess the influences of needle-related factors on the performance of EUS-LB. Additionally, we aimed to assess the influence of various criteria on specimen adequacy.

We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library databases up to 10 October 2021. The primary outcome was diagnostic yield, specimen adequacy, qualified specimens evaluated by rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE). The secondary outcome was adverse events. Subgroup analyses were based on needle type, needle size, fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle type. A sensitivity analysis was conducted on specimen adequacy based on two definition criteria.

In total, 33 studies were included. Pooled rates of diagnostic yield, specimen adequacy, qualified specimen by ROSE, adverse events were 95%, 84%, 93%, 3%. Subgroup analyses showed that Acquire needles generated higher diagnostic yield than SharkCore needles (99% vs. 88%, p = .047). Additionally, FNB needles demonstrated a higher rate of adverse events than FNA needles (6% vs. 1%, p = .028). Sensitivity analysis on specimen adequacy based on various criteria demonstrated that the specimen adequacy rate defined by the AASLD criterion was lower than that of the commonly-used criterion (37% vs. 84%, p = .001).

EUS-LB is effective and safe for liver biopsy. Acquire needles provide better specimens than SharkCore needles. FNB needles may increase the risk of adverse events compared with FNA needles. The AASLD criterion is harder to achieve than the commonly-used criterion.