Background and Aims
Rapid on-site-evaluation (ROSE) with an in-room cytopathologist (ROSE-P) has been
shown to improve the diagnostic yield of specimens obtained from patients undergoing
EUS-guided FNA or fine-needle biopsy sampling (EUS-FNAB) of pancreatic lesions. Recently,
there has been an increased interest and use of ROSE using telecytology (ROSE-T) to
optimize clinical workflows and to address social distancing mandates created during
the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. The purpose of this study was to compare diagnostic
outcomes of ROSE-P and ROSE-T.
Methods
A single-center cohort study of patients who underwent EUS-FNAB of solid pancreatic
lesions with ROSE was conducted. The primary outcome was overall diagnostic yield
of cancer. All patients who underwent EUS-FNAB were entered into a prospectively maintained
database. Statistical analyses were performed using descriptive statistics and univariate
analysis.
Results
There were 165 patients in each arm. There was no difference in diagnostic yield between
ROSE-P and ROSE-T (96.4% vs 94.5%, P = .428). ROSE-T was associated with an increased use of 22-gauge needles (P = .006) and more needle passes (P < .001). No significant differences were found in age, gender, lesion size, needle
type, procedure times, or adverse events between the 2 groups (P < .05 for all). More pancreatic tail lesions were sampled in the ROSE-P group (P < .001).
Conclusions
ROSE-T was not associated with any difference in final histologic diagnosis for EUS-FNAB
of solid pancreatic masses. This has important implications for optimizing clinical
workflows.
Abbreviations:
COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019), EUS-FNAB (EUS-guided FNA or fine-needle biopsy sampling), ROSE (rapid on-site evaluation), ROSE-P (rapid on-site evaluation with an in-room cytopathologist), ROSE-T (rapid on-site evaluation using telecytology (remote cytopathologist))To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Gastrointestinal EndoscopyAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Role of endoscopic ultrasound in the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer.World J Gastrointest Oncol. 2014; 6: 360-368
- Telecytology for rapid on-site evaluation: current status.J Am Soc Cytopathol. 2018; 7: 1-6
- The efficacy of rapid on-site evaluation during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic masses.Gastroenterol Rep. 2018; 6: 45-48
- Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) with EUS-FNA: the ROSE looks beautiful.Endosc Ultrasound. 2019; 8: 283-287
- Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy with or without rapid on-site evaluation for diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial.Gastroenterology. 2021; 161: 899-909
- Dynamic telecytology compares favorably to rapid onsite evaluation of endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspirates.Dig Dis Sci. 2012; 57: 3092-3097
- A superior method for cell block preparation for fine-needle aspiration biopsies.Cancer Cytopathol. 2016; 124: 508-518
- Rapid on-site evaluation of endoscopic-ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration diagnosis of pancreatic masses.World J Gastroenterol. 2014; 20: 9451-9457
- Implementation of telecytology for immediate assessment of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspirations compared to conventional on-site evaluation: analysis of 240 consecutive cases.Acta Cytol. 2012; 56: 548-553
- Psychological aspects of utilizing telecytology for rapid on-site adequacy assessments.J Pathol Inform. 2018; 9: 12
- A prospective, randomized trial comparing 25-gauge and 22-gauge needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic masses.Scand J Gastroenterol. 2013; 48: 752-757
- EUS-guided FNA: better samples with smaller needles?.Gastrointest Endosc. 2009; 70: 1098-1100
- The diagnostic accuracy of 22-gauge and 25-gauge needles in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: a meta-analysis.Endoscopy. 2013; 45: 86-92
- Assessment of complications of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration.Gastrointest Endosc. 2001; 53: 470-474
- The risk factors for acute pancreatitis after endoscopic ultrasound guided biopsy.Korean J Gastroenterol. 2018; 72: 135-140
Article info
Publication history
Published online: October 13, 2022
Accepted:
October 9,
2022
Received:
May 19,
2022
Publication stage
In Press Journal Pre-ProofFootnotes
DISCLOSURE: The following author disclosed financial relationships: R. Balassanian: Consultant for Genentech, stockholder in Cerus Corp. M. Arain: Consultant for Boston Scientific and Olympus. All other authors disclosed no financial relationships.
Identification
Copyright
© 2023 by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
