**The Use of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Cytopathology Diagnosis**

Lee-Ching Zhu, Qinghua Feng and Verena S. Grieco

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52549

### **1. Introduction**

Since the introduction of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in the 1980s, EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has become increasingly popular for the diagnosis and staging of gas‐ trointestinal diseases, and peri-gastrointestinal lesions, especially in the areas of pancreatic or peri-pancreatic mass-like lesions. The application of FNA has dramatically expanded the clinical utility of EUS[1-10].

The aims of this chapter are to review:


### **2. Aim 1: The advantage of EUS-FNA in cytopathology diagnosis over other diagnostic modalities**

In the absence of EUS-FNA, there are many alternatives for obtaining biopsy specimens of mass lesions in the chest and abdomen [11]. This is done most frequently by transcutaneous

ultrasound (TUS), or CT-guided biopsy. Pathology specimens of obstructing lung masses and/or large paratracheal lymph nodes often are obtained at bronchoscopy with forceps or by transbronchial needle aspiration. Pathology specimens of pancreatic masses, especially those causing obstructive jaundice are still commonly obtained at the time of diagnostic or therapeutic ERCP (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography) with brushing, needle aspiration, or intraductal biopsy forceps. When lesions cannot be accessed by the above techniques, more invasive methods, such as mediastinoscopy or operative biopsy (laparo‐ scopic or open) are used. The primary limitations of TUS and CT-guided aspiration include difficulty in accurately targeting small lesions and finding a safe-skin-to-lesion route, espe‐ cially for deep-seated retroperitoneal, mediastinal or perirectal lesions. The diagnostic yield of pancreatic malignancies with ERCP biopsy is particularly problematic, with reported sen‐ sitivities ranging from 20% to 80%, and most series having yields of a definitive malignant diagnosis of only around 50%. The complication rate for ERCP cytologic brushing is report‐ edly as high as 11% for the biliary tree and 21% for pancreatic strictures [12-14].

proach to a lesion, such as through esophageal, gastric or duodenal path. In the case of pancreatic neoplasms, because of EUS-FNA imaging advantages, high diagnostic yields and concern over needle-tract seeding with transcutaneous aspiration, the 6th edition of the handbook on cancer staging by the American Joint Committee on Cancer has recommended

The Use of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Cytopathology Diagnosis

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52549

289

Lastly, EUS-FNA has also opened the era of interventional endoscopic ultrasound (IEUS). In the same way as FNA, the close proximity between the needle tip and the targeted organ allows therapeutic procedures, such as injection therapies, to be performed safely and effec‐ tively. This includes EUS-guided celiac plexus neurolysis and block for pain relief, drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts and pelvic fluid collections, and implantation of fiducial markers and radioactive seeds into malignant tumors. Other emerging EUS-guided experimental techniques include antitumor injection, ablation of tumors, and vascular access. IEUS is a

On a different note, performance quality in endoscopy is becoming an important issue for patient care. Currently there is no universally accepted method for performance quality in‐ dicators in EUS, mostly because cancer staging accuracy cannot be verified without surgical resection. In addition, FNA yields of many sites (such as mediastinal lymph nodes) vary greatly based on pretest probabilities. Because most pancreatic masses that undergo EUS-FNA have a very high pretest probability of being malignant and most endosonographers agree that pancreatic neoplasms are among the most difficult lesions on which to perform EUS-FNA, the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic masses has become a bench‐ mark for EUS-FNA quality. Much of the data for performance quality has come from series on pancreatic EUS-FNA, which is also the approach of most of our studies discussed in this chapter. In a multicenter retrospective study of 1075 patients who underwent EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses, the overall diagnostic rate of malignancy was 71%, the me‐ dian rate per center was 78% and the median rate per endoscopist was 75% [29], remarkably

The ideal benchmark for pancreatic EUS-FNA performance, however, would be the actual sensitivity and specificity of diagnosing malignancy and require the criterion standard of ei‐ ther surgical pathology or long-term follow-up, which is the focus of our studies in the next

**3. Aim 2: Efficacy and utility of immediate cytologic interpretation on the**

Intra-procedural on-site immediate interpretation by a cytopathologist is not performed in some clinical settings. Having a cytopathologist on site is time-consuming and diverts the pathologist from other duties, and the cytopathologist time is not compensated at the same rate as routine surgical pathology [30, 31]. In the setting of service time pressure, there is a

**diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA of solid and cystic pancreatic and peri-**

EUS-FNA as the preferred sampling technique in pancreatic masses if available[25].

very promising technique with many potential applications [26-28].

higher than any other aforementioned diagnostic modalities.

section.

**pancreatic lesions**

Commercial radial echoendoscopes were introduced by the Olympus Corporation in 1987. Although EUS-FNA was performed successfully with radial echoendoscopes, it was not un‐ til 1991, when the linear-array echoendoscopes by Pentax Precision Instruments were intro‐ duced, that EUS-FNA has been extensively utilized for a variety of lesions. Fundamentally, EUS-FNA involves passing an 18- to 25-gauge aspiration needle through the biopsy port of an echoendoscope under real-time guidance into a EUS visualized mass lesion, lymph node, lesion within another organ, or fluid collection.

Although EUS is considered superior to MRI or CT with cross-sectional imaging for tumor detection smaller than 2 to 3 cm [15, 16], it is the ability to target and place a needle into suspicious lesions at the closest proximity between the tip of the echoendoscope and the tar‐ geted lesion that has made EUS-FNA indispensable in the pre-operative diagnosis, especial‐ ly in situations where neoadjuvant therapies or non-surgical management might be the clinical choice. Determining the role of EUS-FNA when alternative diagnostic modalities are available is difficult to assess in clinical trials; however, decision analysis models have been used to study the impact of EUS-FNA in lesions of many sites, including non-small-cell lung cancer with mediastinaladenopathy [17, 18], esophageal cancer and pancreatic cancer [19-21]. Commonly employed diagnostic modalities including CT-guided or US-guided FNA, ERCP with brushing, laparoscopic surgical biopsy and EUS-FNA have been analyzed for their costs, failure rate, testing characteristics and complication rate. In each of these analyses, EUS-FNA is the most cost-effective approach as the primary diagnostic modality and the preferred secondary alternative method after a failed initial diagnostic method as the least costly follow-up method.

The overall complication rate of EUS-FNA appears to be about 1-2% [22, 23], comparable to that reported with CT or US-guided FNA or biopsy. However, another significant factor fa‐ voring EUS-FNA over transcutaneous biopsy is avoiding the possible risk of needle-tract seeding[24]. During EUS-FNA the aspiration needle travels from the gut lumen to the lesion, a pathway that usually does not involve significant crossing of peritoneal or pleural surfa‐ ces. In addition, endosonographers may have multiple options for the most accessible ap‐ proach to a lesion, such as through esophageal, gastric or duodenal path. In the case of pancreatic neoplasms, because of EUS-FNA imaging advantages, high diagnostic yields and concern over needle-tract seeding with transcutaneous aspiration, the 6th edition of the handbook on cancer staging by the American Joint Committee on Cancer has recommended EUS-FNA as the preferred sampling technique in pancreatic masses if available[25].

ultrasound (TUS), or CT-guided biopsy. Pathology specimens of obstructing lung masses and/or large paratracheal lymph nodes often are obtained at bronchoscopy with forceps or by transbronchial needle aspiration. Pathology specimens of pancreatic masses, especially those causing obstructive jaundice are still commonly obtained at the time of diagnostic or therapeutic ERCP (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography) with brushing, needle aspiration, or intraductal biopsy forceps. When lesions cannot be accessed by the above techniques, more invasive methods, such as mediastinoscopy or operative biopsy (laparo‐ scopic or open) are used. The primary limitations of TUS and CT-guided aspiration include difficulty in accurately targeting small lesions and finding a safe-skin-to-lesion route, espe‐ cially for deep-seated retroperitoneal, mediastinal or perirectal lesions. The diagnostic yield of pancreatic malignancies with ERCP biopsy is particularly problematic, with reported sen‐ sitivities ranging from 20% to 80%, and most series having yields of a definitive malignant diagnosis of only around 50%. The complication rate for ERCP cytologic brushing is report‐

edly as high as 11% for the biliary tree and 21% for pancreatic strictures [12-14].

lesion within another organ, or fluid collection.

288 Endoscopy

the least costly follow-up method.

Commercial radial echoendoscopes were introduced by the Olympus Corporation in 1987. Although EUS-FNA was performed successfully with radial echoendoscopes, it was not un‐ til 1991, when the linear-array echoendoscopes by Pentax Precision Instruments were intro‐ duced, that EUS-FNA has been extensively utilized for a variety of lesions. Fundamentally, EUS-FNA involves passing an 18- to 25-gauge aspiration needle through the biopsy port of an echoendoscope under real-time guidance into a EUS visualized mass lesion, lymph node,

Although EUS is considered superior to MRI or CT with cross-sectional imaging for tumor detection smaller than 2 to 3 cm [15, 16], it is the ability to target and place a needle into suspicious lesions at the closest proximity between the tip of the echoendoscope and the tar‐ geted lesion that has made EUS-FNA indispensable in the pre-operative diagnosis, especial‐ ly in situations where neoadjuvant therapies or non-surgical management might be the clinical choice. Determining the role of EUS-FNA when alternative diagnostic modalities are available is difficult to assess in clinical trials; however, decision analysis models have been used to study the impact of EUS-FNA in lesions of many sites, including non-small-cell lung cancer with mediastinaladenopathy [17, 18], esophageal cancer and pancreatic cancer [19-21]. Commonly employed diagnostic modalities including CT-guided or US-guided FNA, ERCP with brushing, laparoscopic surgical biopsy and EUS-FNA have been analyzed for their costs, failure rate, testing characteristics and complication rate. In each of these analyses, EUS-FNA is the most cost-effective approach as the primary diagnostic modality and the preferred secondary alternative method after a failed initial diagnostic method as

The overall complication rate of EUS-FNA appears to be about 1-2% [22, 23], comparable to that reported with CT or US-guided FNA or biopsy. However, another significant factor fa‐ voring EUS-FNA over transcutaneous biopsy is avoiding the possible risk of needle-tract seeding[24]. During EUS-FNA the aspiration needle travels from the gut lumen to the lesion, a pathway that usually does not involve significant crossing of peritoneal or pleural surfa‐ ces. In addition, endosonographers may have multiple options for the most accessible ap‐ Lastly, EUS-FNA has also opened the era of interventional endoscopic ultrasound (IEUS). In the same way as FNA, the close proximity between the needle tip and the targeted organ allows therapeutic procedures, such as injection therapies, to be performed safely and effec‐ tively. This includes EUS-guided celiac plexus neurolysis and block for pain relief, drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts and pelvic fluid collections, and implantation of fiducial markers and radioactive seeds into malignant tumors. Other emerging EUS-guided experimental techniques include antitumor injection, ablation of tumors, and vascular access. IEUS is a very promising technique with many potential applications [26-28].

On a different note, performance quality in endoscopy is becoming an important issue for patient care. Currently there is no universally accepted method for performance quality in‐ dicators in EUS, mostly because cancer staging accuracy cannot be verified without surgical resection. In addition, FNA yields of many sites (such as mediastinal lymph nodes) vary greatly based on pretest probabilities. Because most pancreatic masses that undergo EUS-FNA have a very high pretest probability of being malignant and most endosonographers agree that pancreatic neoplasms are among the most difficult lesions on which to perform EUS-FNA, the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic masses has become a bench‐ mark for EUS-FNA quality. Much of the data for performance quality has come from series on pancreatic EUS-FNA, which is also the approach of most of our studies discussed in this chapter. In a multicenter retrospective study of 1075 patients who underwent EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses, the overall diagnostic rate of malignancy was 71%, the me‐ dian rate per center was 78% and the median rate per endoscopist was 75% [29], remarkably higher than any other aforementioned diagnostic modalities.

The ideal benchmark for pancreatic EUS-FNA performance, however, would be the actual sensitivity and specificity of diagnosing malignancy and require the criterion standard of ei‐ ther surgical pathology or long-term follow-up, which is the focus of our studies in the next section.

### **3. Aim 2: Efficacy and utility of immediate cytologic interpretation on the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA of solid and cystic pancreatic and peripancreatic lesions**

Intra-procedural on-site immediate interpretation by a cytopathologist is not performed in some clinical settings. Having a cytopathologist on site is time-consuming and diverts the pathologist from other duties, and the cytopathologist time is not compensated at the same rate as routine surgical pathology [30, 31]. In the setting of service time pressure, there is a need for evidence based decisions regarding how to allocate pathologists. The clinical im‐ pact of immediate interpretation provided by cytopathologists during the EUS-FNA proce‐ dure and the statistical significance of this cytologic service has been welldocumented[32-43], although with variable conclusions. Many of the previous studies have included a wide range of disease entities sampled by EUS-FNA procedure. In addition, by including cystic lesions, previous analysis has been complicated by the high likelihood of acellular or pauci-cellular specimens obtained from the cystic lesions, which could be inter‐ preted as inadequate on cytology. Thus, the clarity of outcome measurements from previous studies has been hindered by the complexity of the diseases included, and by inclusion of cystic lesions with an unduly high "inadequacy" rate. In addition, many previous studies have used clinical survival years as a surrogate for final assessment of diagnostic accuracy. Our goal in the hereby presented study is to use EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic masses as the benchmark procedure to compare diagnostic yield and accuracy in a strictly defined clinical setting of EUS-FNA performed in the presence or absence of on-site immediate cytologic in‐ terpretation. Histologic examination is used as the gold standard for comparison.

Of the 215 cases, surgical pathology follow-up was available for 55 cases. As would be ex‐ pected, the majority of pancreatic mass lesions with surgical pathology comprised chronic pancreatitis (n=14), pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (n=29), and pancreatic endocrine neo‐

The Use of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Cytopathology Diagnosis

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52549

291

With histologic follow-up, we identified one false positive case, both at immediate inter‐ pretation and at final cytologic review, for which no neoplasm was identified at the open surgery or at repeat EUS-FNA procedure; this may have been a reactive mass that resolved after resolution of inflammation (with 12 months follow up). Cases with nega‐ tive cytology results usually do not progress to surgical intervention, and surgical resec‐ tion is also not performed in cases with unresectable malignancy. Due to the expected small number of cytologically negative cases with histologic follow-up, the single false positive case would have weighed un-proportionally in the calculation of specificity and positive predictive value. False negative cases represented well-differentiated pancreatic adenocarcinomas and cases of unrepresentative sampling, including one case of fibro‐ matosis of pancreas. The number of cases with diagnostic discrepancy between cytolog‐ ic and histologic diagnoses, and the corresponding statistical values, are summarized in Table 3 and Table 4. When comparing cases with on-site cytopathology immediate in‐ terpretation to those without, there was a trend toward greater sensitivity (83% versus 65%, p=0.19) with similar specificity (86% versus 100%, p=0.29). There was also a trend toward lower cytologic-histologic discordance rate in cases with availability of immedi‐ ate interpretation by cytopathologists (16% versus 27%, p=0.34). Positive predictive val‐ ue was comparable for cases where cytopathologists were present on-site compared with cases where no cytopathologists were present (94% versus 100%, p=0. 32), but the availability of immediate interpretation resulted in a higher negative predictive value

**Case Type Case Number (N)**

Chronic pancreatitis 14

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma 29

Pancreatic endocrine neoplasm 7

Solid pseudopapillary neoplasm of pancreas 2

Lymphoma 2

Fibromatosis 1

**Table 2.** Cases with histologic diagnoses (total N=55)

(67% versus 47%, p=0.34).

plasms (n=7) (Table 2).

To avoid the confounding sampling issues of cystic lesions, this study was focused on the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA in non-cystic pancreatic mass-like lesions. A computer inven‐ tory search located 215 cases during the years 1999-2007 at University of Washington Medi‐ cal Center and Harborview Medical Center, both in Seattle, WA, USA. These included 100 cases where immediate cytologic interpretation was available and 115 cases without imme‐ diate interpretation. Surgical pathology and clinical follow-up information were evaluated whenever possible. Comparison between the cytologic diagnoses with or without on-site immediate cytologic interpretation was facilitated by well-documented cytology reports. "Positive" specimens were defined as suspicious or malignant cytology. "Inadequate" speci‐ mens were defined as "rare atypical cells, non-diagnostic"; "essentially acellular specimen", or "gastrointestinal tract carry-over material". "Negative" specimens were defined as "ade‐ quate cellularity with benign or reactive features".

As shown in Table 1, the rate of inadequate specimens was significantly lower for cases with immediate cytologic interpretation (1% versus 21%; p <0. 0001). Although not statistically significant, there was a trend toward the need for fewer repeat procedures with the availa‐ bility of immediate evaluation (rate 5% versus 10%; p <0. 3).


**Table 1.** EUS-FNA of non-cystic pancreatic mass-like lesions with or without immediate interpretation for all cases (N=215)

Of the 215 cases, surgical pathology follow-up was available for 55 cases. As would be ex‐ pected, the majority of pancreatic mass lesions with surgical pathology comprised chronic pancreatitis (n=14), pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (n=29), and pancreatic endocrine neo‐ plasms (n=7) (Table 2).


#### **Table 2.** Cases with histologic diagnoses (total N=55)

need for evidence based decisions regarding how to allocate pathologists. The clinical im‐ pact of immediate interpretation provided by cytopathologists during the EUS-FNA proce‐ dure and the statistical significance of this cytologic service has been welldocumented[32-43], although with variable conclusions. Many of the previous studies have included a wide range of disease entities sampled by EUS-FNA procedure. In addition, by including cystic lesions, previous analysis has been complicated by the high likelihood of acellular or pauci-cellular specimens obtained from the cystic lesions, which could be inter‐ preted as inadequate on cytology. Thus, the clarity of outcome measurements from previous studies has been hindered by the complexity of the diseases included, and by inclusion of cystic lesions with an unduly high "inadequacy" rate. In addition, many previous studies have used clinical survival years as a surrogate for final assessment of diagnostic accuracy. Our goal in the hereby presented study is to use EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic masses as the benchmark procedure to compare diagnostic yield and accuracy in a strictly defined clinical setting of EUS-FNA performed in the presence or absence of on-site immediate cytologic in‐

terpretation. Histologic examination is used as the gold standard for comparison.

quate cellularity with benign or reactive features".

bility of immediate evaluation (rate 5% versus 10%; p <0. 3).

**N = Positive On Cytology**

Immediate Interpretation

No immediate Interpretation

(N = 100)

290 Endoscopy

(N = 115)

(N=215)

To avoid the confounding sampling issues of cystic lesions, this study was focused on the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA in non-cystic pancreatic mass-like lesions. A computer inven‐ tory search located 215 cases during the years 1999-2007 at University of Washington Medi‐ cal Center and Harborview Medical Center, both in Seattle, WA, USA. These included 100 cases where immediate cytologic interpretation was available and 115 cases without imme‐ diate interpretation. Surgical pathology and clinical follow-up information were evaluated whenever possible. Comparison between the cytologic diagnoses with or without on-site immediate cytologic interpretation was facilitated by well-documented cytology reports. "Positive" specimens were defined as suspicious or malignant cytology. "Inadequate" speci‐ mens were defined as "rare atypical cells, non-diagnostic"; "essentially acellular specimen", or "gastrointestinal tract carry-over material". "Negative" specimens were defined as "ade‐

As shown in Table 1, the rate of inadequate specimens was significantly lower for cases with immediate cytologic interpretation (1% versus 21%; p <0. 0001). Although not statistically significant, there was a trend toward the need for fewer repeat procedures with the availa‐

> **N = Negative On Cytology**

**Table 1.** EUS-FNA of non-cystic pancreatic mass-like lesions with or without immediate interpretation for all cases

P Value < 0. 0001 < 0. 3

**Inadequate Case**

**Repeat EUS-FNA Procedure N (%)**

**N (%)**

60 39 1 (1%) 5 (5%)

58 33 24 (21%) 11 (10%)

With histologic follow-up, we identified one false positive case, both at immediate inter‐ pretation and at final cytologic review, for which no neoplasm was identified at the open surgery or at repeat EUS-FNA procedure; this may have been a reactive mass that resolved after resolution of inflammation (with 12 months follow up). Cases with nega‐ tive cytology results usually do not progress to surgical intervention, and surgical resec‐ tion is also not performed in cases with unresectable malignancy. Due to the expected small number of cytologically negative cases with histologic follow-up, the single false positive case would have weighed un-proportionally in the calculation of specificity and positive predictive value. False negative cases represented well-differentiated pancreatic adenocarcinomas and cases of unrepresentative sampling, including one case of fibro‐ matosis of pancreas. The number of cases with diagnostic discrepancy between cytolog‐ ic and histologic diagnoses, and the corresponding statistical values, are summarized in Table 3 and Table 4. When comparing cases with on-site cytopathology immediate in‐ terpretation to those without, there was a trend toward greater sensitivity (83% versus 65%, p=0.19) with similar specificity (86% versus 100%, p=0.29). There was also a trend toward lower cytologic-histologic discordance rate in cases with availability of immedi‐ ate interpretation by cytopathologists (16% versus 27%, p=0.34). Positive predictive val‐ ue was comparable for cases where cytopathologists were present on-site compared with cases where no cytopathologists were present (94% versus 100%, p=0. 32), but the availability of immediate interpretation resulted in a higher negative predictive value (67% versus 47%, p=0.34).


equacy rate was 21%, a rate at which the procedure may not be cost effective over other di‐ agnostic options. On-site immediate cytology interpretation of EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic lesions thus results in cost savings, reduced intervals between diagnosis and therapeutic in‐

The Use of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Cytopathology Diagnosis

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52549

293

An important task at the EUS-FNA procedure is representative sampling of the lesion. With on-site immediate microscopic evaluation of part of the sample, an experienced cytologist should be able to assess the cellularity of the sampling and to differentiate gastrointestinal tract carryover material from moderately to poorly differentiated malignant cells. The pres‐ ence of dense numbers of inflammatory cells, necrotic debris, and fibrous stromal elements provides good evidence that the endosonographer is actually sampling the targeted lesion. In our experience, on-site communication with immediate feedback is invaluable in guiding the next needle pass. Another indispensable value is that immediate evaluation gives the pathologists the best opportunity to triage the sampled material for its optimal use, includ‐ ing sending fresh specimen for flow cytometry analysis for possible lymphoproliferative dis‐ ease, sending cyst contents for microbiology tests, or chemical analysis for tumor markers, such as amylase, CEA, CA19-9, etc. All those commonly available laboratory tests cannot be

What is the impact of EUS-FNA on-site evaluation in situations of non-solid pancreatic le‐ sions [48-52]? In our daily practice of cytology, EUS-FNA specimens comprise almost half the volume of our on-site immediate assessment service. There are occasions when the aspirated material has presented with an unusual or unexpected, and yet remarkable gross appearance. On-site availability gives us the advantage of observing the gross appearance of freshly aspi‐ rated material. With increased experience, we feel these grossly "unusual" aspirates can ac‐ tually help to raise our suspicion towards a relatively specific diagnosis and triage the material for certain helpful laboratory tests. In our 2008 publication, we conducted 10-year in‐ stitutional case review and summarized three different patterns of gross appearance of aspi‐

rated material from non-neoplastic pancreatic and peri-pancreatic cystic lesions [53].

Case 1: we encountered two patients who presented with almost identical gross and micro‐ scopic findings at EUS-FNA. The first patient was a 52-year-old male with a past medical history of acute gallstone pancreatitis 4 years prior, treated by cholecystectomy. He has had no other episodes of pancreatitis after the surgery. During a workup for his nephrolithiasis, CT scan incidentally identified a 3 cm unilocular cyst adjacent to the neck and body of his pancreas. Endoscopic ultrasound was requested in order to evaluate this peri-pancreatic cystic lesion. On site, EUS revealed a 3.4 cm primarily hypoechoic lesion. Aspirated material had an unusual yellowish-green gross appearance with a pasty texture. Microscopically, the smears contain rare squamous cells of gut luminal origin, abundant amorphous material and acellular debris (Figure 1, A). A Hall's stain for bilirubin showed focal staining, sugges‐ tive of bile pigment (Figure 1, B). Serum amylase assay was within normal range during this period. In light of the cytological finding and clinical presentation, it was felt that the lesion was most consistent with a small, chronic biloma, which likely developed at the time of his

**3.1. Pattern 1: Grossly yellowish-green pasty material**

tervention, and enhanced patient care.

performed once the specimen is fixed.

**Table 3.** Discrepancy between cytologic and histologic diagnoses (N=55)


*Positive predictive value on cytology (PPV):TP/TP+FP*

*Negative predictive value on cytology (NPV):TN/TN+FN*

**Table 4.** Performance characteristics according to the availability of on-site cytopathology (N=55 cases)

In this study, the drop of the inadequacy rate from 21% without on-site immediate interpre‐ tation to 1% with on-site immediate interpretation is highly statistically significant (p value < 0.0001). The repeat procedure rate dropped correspondingly from 10% to 5%. It has been shown that EUS-FNA would lose its advantage over the other diagnostic options if its fail‐ ure rate were over 20% [44]. The EUS-FNA procedure in various body sites (thyroid, breast, lung, etc. ) generally has a comparable reported failure rate when performed without imme‐ diate interpretation, with an average failure rate of 20% and a maximum of reported failure rate of 32% [32, 33, 45-47]. In our current study, without immediate interpretation, our inad‐ equacy rate was 21%, a rate at which the procedure may not be cost effective over other di‐ agnostic options. On-site immediate cytology interpretation of EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic lesions thus results in cost savings, reduced intervals between diagnosis and therapeutic in‐ tervention, and enhanced patient care.

An important task at the EUS-FNA procedure is representative sampling of the lesion. With on-site immediate microscopic evaluation of part of the sample, an experienced cytologist should be able to assess the cellularity of the sampling and to differentiate gastrointestinal tract carryover material from moderately to poorly differentiated malignant cells. The pres‐ ence of dense numbers of inflammatory cells, necrotic debris, and fibrous stromal elements provides good evidence that the endosonographer is actually sampling the targeted lesion. In our experience, on-site communication with immediate feedback is invaluable in guiding the next needle pass. Another indispensable value is that immediate evaluation gives the pathologists the best opportunity to triage the sampled material for its optimal use, includ‐ ing sending fresh specimen for flow cytometry analysis for possible lymphoproliferative dis‐ ease, sending cyst contents for microbiology tests, or chemical analysis for tumor markers, such as amylase, CEA, CA19-9, etc. All those commonly available laboratory tests cannot be performed once the specimen is fixed.

What is the impact of EUS-FNA on-site evaluation in situations of non-solid pancreatic le‐ sions [48-52]? In our daily practice of cytology, EUS-FNA specimens comprise almost half the volume of our on-site immediate assessment service. There are occasions when the aspirated material has presented with an unusual or unexpected, and yet remarkable gross appearance. On-site availability gives us the advantage of observing the gross appearance of freshly aspi‐ rated material. With increased experience, we feel these grossly "unusual" aspirates can ac‐ tually help to raise our suspicion towards a relatively specific diagnosis and triage the material for certain helpful laboratory tests. In our 2008 publication, we conducted 10-year in‐ stitutional case review and summarized three different patterns of gross appearance of aspi‐ rated material from non-neoplastic pancreatic and peri-pancreatic cystic lesions [53].

#### **3.1. Pattern 1: Grossly yellowish-green pasty material**

**N=Positive cytology, neoplastic histology (TP)**

On-Site Interpretation

292 Endoscopy

No On-Site Interpretation

On-Site Interpretation

No On-Site Interpretation

*Discordance rate:FP+FN/T Sensitivity:TP/TP+FN Specificity:TN/TN+FP*

TP:True positive cytologic diagnosis FP:False positive cytologic diagnosis TN:True negative cytologic diagnosis FN:False negative cytologic diagnosis **N= Positive cytology, benign histology (FP)**

**Table 3.** Discrepancy between cytologic and histologic diagnoses (N=55)

**Histologic follow-up available**

*Histological follow-up available: T=TP+FP+TN+FN*

*Positive predictive value on cytology (PPV):TP/TP+FP Negative predictive value on cytology (NPV):TN/TN+FN* **N=Benign cytology, benign histology (TN)**

15 1 6 3 25

15 0 7 8 30

**N=Benign cytology, neoplastic histology (FN)**

**Discordance rate Sensitivity Specificity PPV NPV**

25 16% 83% 86% 94% 67%

30 27% 65% 100% 100% 47%

**Table 4.** Performance characteristics according to the availability of on-site cytopathology (N=55 cases)

In this study, the drop of the inadequacy rate from 21% without on-site immediate interpre‐ tation to 1% with on-site immediate interpretation is highly statistically significant (p value < 0.0001). The repeat procedure rate dropped correspondingly from 10% to 5%. It has been shown that EUS-FNA would lose its advantage over the other diagnostic options if its fail‐ ure rate were over 20% [44]. The EUS-FNA procedure in various body sites (thyroid, breast, lung, etc. ) generally has a comparable reported failure rate when performed without imme‐ diate interpretation, with an average failure rate of 20% and a maximum of reported failure rate of 32% [32, 33, 45-47]. In our current study, without immediate interpretation, our inad‐

**N= Total histologic follow-up available (TP+FP+TN+FN)**

> Case 1: we encountered two patients who presented with almost identical gross and micro‐ scopic findings at EUS-FNA. The first patient was a 52-year-old male with a past medical history of acute gallstone pancreatitis 4 years prior, treated by cholecystectomy. He has had no other episodes of pancreatitis after the surgery. During a workup for his nephrolithiasis, CT scan incidentally identified a 3 cm unilocular cyst adjacent to the neck and body of his pancreas. Endoscopic ultrasound was requested in order to evaluate this peri-pancreatic cystic lesion. On site, EUS revealed a 3.4 cm primarily hypoechoic lesion. Aspirated material had an unusual yellowish-green gross appearance with a pasty texture. Microscopically, the smears contain rare squamous cells of gut luminal origin, abundant amorphous material and acellular debris (Figure 1, A). A Hall's stain for bilirubin showed focal staining, sugges‐ tive of bile pigment (Figure 1, B). Serum amylase assay was within normal range during this period. In light of the cytological finding and clinical presentation, it was felt that the lesion was most consistent with a small, chronic biloma, which likely developed at the time of his

cholecystectomy. Follow up CT scan revealed an unchanged cyst and no further evaluation was recommended.

for malignancy. The patient subsequently underwent a distal pancreatectomy and splenecto‐ my. Surgical pathology specimen revealed a cyst present in the adipose tissue adjacent to the pancreas filled with tan-white cheesy material. Microscopically, the cyst is lined by mature ker‐ atinizing squamous epithelium and lymphoid tissue with germinal centers surrounding the epithelium, consistent with a lymphoepithelial cyst (LEC) of the pancreas (Figure 2, C & D). The possibility of a dermoid cyst was also considered due to the evident sebaceous gland dif‐ ferentiation beneath the squamous epithelium. However, the lack of hair follicles and sweat glands and the presence of dense lymphoid tissue with germinal centers were most consistent with the diagnosis of LEC of the pancreas. We presume that the abundant oily material filling the cyst was partially due to the secretion of the sebaceous glands that accumulated intracyto‐ plasmic lipid droplets and produced oily sebum extracellularly. Mixed in with keratin debris, this material could account for the unusual gross-appearance of that tan-white semi-solid athe‐

The Use of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Cytopathology Diagnosis

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52549

295

**Figure 2.** Microscopic findings of a lymphoepithelial cyst of pancreas with sebaceous differentiation. Panel A:Highpower view of cytology aspiration revealing abundant amorphous degenerate material (Papanicolaou stain, 400x). Panel B:Oil-Red O stain on air-dried slides showing focally variable fat staining (Oil-Red O 100x). Panel C:Low-power view of the subsequent surgical pathology specimen revealing a pancreatic cystic lesion lined by mature keratinizing squamous epithelium and lymphoid tissue with germinal centers surrounding the epithelium (Hematoxylin and eosin stain, 100x). Panel D:High-power view showing evident sebaceous gland differentiation of the squamous epithelial

romatous material aspirated from this patient on EUS-FNA.

lining of the cyst (Hematoxylin and eosin stain, 400x).

**Figure 1.** Representative cytologic findings in a case of biloma. Panel A:High-power view showing abundant amor‐ phous material and acellular debris (Papanicolaou stain, 400x). Panel B: A Hall's stain for bilirubin showed focal stain‐ ing, suggestive of bile pigment (Hall's stain, 400x).

Case 2: the second patient was a 39-year-old male with a history of chronic pancreatitis. During the workup for his intermittent upper abdominal pain, CT scan revealed a 2 cm hy‐ podense mass off the tail of his pancreas. The patient underwent EUS-FNA twice. Each time EUS revealed a 2cm hypoechoic mass off the tail of the pancreas and grossly similar copious yellowish-green material was aspirated and submitted for cytology. Microscopically, both EUS-FNA specimens from this patient revealed almost identical findings as our previous case with abundant bile-stained cyst contents and amorphous debris (Data not shown). No inflammation was present. Concurrent serum CA19-9 assay was within normal limits. Al‐ though a specific diagnosis of biloma was not rendered on the original report, findings ar‐ gue for a benign cystic lesion and a CT follow-up for the stability of the lesion was recommended without further intervention.

#### **3.2. Pattern 2: Grossly tan-white cheesy material**

Case 3: this was a 42-year-old male with chronic alcohol use and chronic hepatitis B and HIV co-infection. CT scan found a cystic lesion near the pancreatic tail, which had been stable in size. EUS identified a 2.5 cm complex cystic lesion adjacent to the pancreatic tail with both cyst‐ ic and solid components. Aspirated material was grossly tan-white in color and semi-solid, cheesy in texture. Most of the material was lost during processing when air-dried or alcoholfixed slides with Diff-Quik or Papanicolaou staining was attempted. Microscopic examination only revealed abundant amorphous degenerate material (Figure 2, A). Given the suspicion that material was dissolved by alcohol, Oil-Red O stain was performed on air-dried slides and showed variable fat staining (Figure 2, B). Because of the unusual gross appearance, the aspi‐ rated material on site was also sent for microbiology (negative findings) and assayed for CEA (164971 ng/ml), and amylase (2357 u/L). The significantly elevated CEA level was concerning for malignancy. The patient subsequently underwent a distal pancreatectomy and splenecto‐ my. Surgical pathology specimen revealed a cyst present in the adipose tissue adjacent to the pancreas filled with tan-white cheesy material. Microscopically, the cyst is lined by mature ker‐ atinizing squamous epithelium and lymphoid tissue with germinal centers surrounding the epithelium, consistent with a lymphoepithelial cyst (LEC) of the pancreas (Figure 2, C & D). The possibility of a dermoid cyst was also considered due to the evident sebaceous gland dif‐ ferentiation beneath the squamous epithelium. However, the lack of hair follicles and sweat glands and the presence of dense lymphoid tissue with germinal centers were most consistent with the diagnosis of LEC of the pancreas. We presume that the abundant oily material filling the cyst was partially due to the secretion of the sebaceous glands that accumulated intracyto‐ plasmic lipid droplets and produced oily sebum extracellularly. Mixed in with keratin debris, this material could account for the unusual gross-appearance of that tan-white semi-solid athe‐ romatous material aspirated from this patient on EUS-FNA.

cholecystectomy. Follow up CT scan revealed an unchanged cyst and no further evaluation

**Figure 1.** Representative cytologic findings in a case of biloma. Panel A:High-power view showing abundant amor‐ phous material and acellular debris (Papanicolaou stain, 400x). Panel B: A Hall's stain for bilirubin showed focal stain‐

Case 2: the second patient was a 39-year-old male with a history of chronic pancreatitis. During the workup for his intermittent upper abdominal pain, CT scan revealed a 2 cm hy‐ podense mass off the tail of his pancreas. The patient underwent EUS-FNA twice. Each time EUS revealed a 2cm hypoechoic mass off the tail of the pancreas and grossly similar copious yellowish-green material was aspirated and submitted for cytology. Microscopically, both EUS-FNA specimens from this patient revealed almost identical findings as our previous case with abundant bile-stained cyst contents and amorphous debris (Data not shown). No inflammation was present. Concurrent serum CA19-9 assay was within normal limits. Al‐ though a specific diagnosis of biloma was not rendered on the original report, findings ar‐ gue for a benign cystic lesion and a CT follow-up for the stability of the lesion was

Case 3: this was a 42-year-old male with chronic alcohol use and chronic hepatitis B and HIV co-infection. CT scan found a cystic lesion near the pancreatic tail, which had been stable in size. EUS identified a 2.5 cm complex cystic lesion adjacent to the pancreatic tail with both cyst‐ ic and solid components. Aspirated material was grossly tan-white in color and semi-solid, cheesy in texture. Most of the material was lost during processing when air-dried or alcoholfixed slides with Diff-Quik or Papanicolaou staining was attempted. Microscopic examination only revealed abundant amorphous degenerate material (Figure 2, A). Given the suspicion that material was dissolved by alcohol, Oil-Red O stain was performed on air-dried slides and showed variable fat staining (Figure 2, B). Because of the unusual gross appearance, the aspi‐ rated material on site was also sent for microbiology (negative findings) and assayed for CEA (164971 ng/ml), and amylase (2357 u/L). The significantly elevated CEA level was concerning

was recommended.

294 Endoscopy

ing, suggestive of bile pigment (Hall's stain, 400x).

recommended without further intervention.

**3.2. Pattern 2: Grossly tan-white cheesy material**

**Figure 2.** Microscopic findings of a lymphoepithelial cyst of pancreas with sebaceous differentiation. Panel A:Highpower view of cytology aspiration revealing abundant amorphous degenerate material (Papanicolaou stain, 400x). Panel B:Oil-Red O stain on air-dried slides showing focally variable fat staining (Oil-Red O 100x). Panel C:Low-power view of the subsequent surgical pathology specimen revealing a pancreatic cystic lesion lined by mature keratinizing squamous epithelium and lymphoid tissue with germinal centers surrounding the epithelium (Hematoxylin and eosin stain, 100x). Panel D:High-power view showing evident sebaceous gland differentiation of the squamous epithelial lining of the cyst (Hematoxylin and eosin stain, 400x).

### **3.3. Pattern 3: Grossly amber clear fluid, can be darker due to thickness**

Cases 4-6: a computer inventory search from year 1997-2007 at University of Washington al‐ lowed us to review three additional cases of lymphoepithelial cysts with cytological diagno‐ sis and follow-up surgical resections. The features of these 3 cases are summarized in Table 5. All those surgical-proven lymphoepithelial cysts showed grossly clear fluid on cytology aspiration with color variation described from light yellow to darker-brown. Available labo‐ ratory data showed low amylase and CEA level. The follow-up surgical specimens revealed simple lymphoepithelial cysts with no sebaceous gland differentiation.

Our experience tells us that being fully aware of the limitations on cytology diagnosis and the high possibility of non-representative sampling of the lesions, cytologists should be ready to reject or classify the specimens as non-diagnostic in many situations of acellular cytological material and thus avoid misleading the clinical decisions with an erroneous di‐ agnosis. On the other hand, based on the individual institute settings and the availabilities of cytopathologists for on-site immediate assessment, cytology diagnosis tends to ignore the gross appearance of the aspirated material and the background material is also often overlooked microscopically, especially in an acellular cytology specimen. Incorporating those gross material observations can sometimes add valuable information towards a

The Use of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Cytopathology Diagnosis

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52549

297

We presented three entities (8 cases) here in an attempt to highlight the diagnostic value of gross appearance in fine needle aspiration cytology that can provide clues to the nature of a pancreatic or a peripancreatic cystic lesion. These three entities: biloma, pancreatic lym‐ phoepithelial cyst and pancreatic pseudocyst, although considered uncommon and not widely represented in the cytology literature, are actually encountered more commonly now with the rapid advance of our imaging and imaging guided-sampling practices. On cytology specimens, those are the lesions that generally produce acellular or sparsely cellu‐ lar material (not including carryover material from gastrointestinal luminal origin). How‐ ever by carefully combining the clinical, radiological, laboratory and cytological findings grossly and microscopically, cytology can help lead to or confirm clinical judgments and

A biloma is an encapsulated bile collection outside the biliary tree. The underlying causes include iatrogenic, traumatic, and spontaneous injury of the biliary tree causing bile leaks. Its diagnosis can be established upon clinical history, imaging studies, and needle aspiration cytology and chemical analysis of the aspirated fluid. The symptomatic biloma if left un‐ treated may result in significant morbidity and mortality. However, non-surgical interven‐ tion is considered the first choice of treatment for biloma, especially in many asymptomatic situations. Alternatively symptomatic biloma may be treated successfully with intervention‐ al radiologic techniques instead of open surgery [54, 55]. It was recently reported that endo‐ scopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of an infected biloma, together with endoscopic biliary stent placement, resulted in complete resolution of a patient's biloma [56]. Thus, cytological diagnosis of biloma upon EUS-FNA can help a great deal in manag‐

A wide variety of cystic lesions can arise within or adjacent to the pancreas. They can be generally placed into non-neoplastic and neoplastic categories. The non-neoplastic cystic le‐ sions can be both congenital and acquired. EUS-FNA has emerged as the primary choice for obtaining diagnostic material on pancreatic cystic lesions. Aspirated cystic fluid analysis for pancreatic enzymes, tumor markers, and fluid viscosity can be of great help in the differen‐ tial diagnosis. Non-neoplastic cysts generally are high on amylase level and low on tumor markers (CEA, CA 19-9) while these tumor markers are generally elevated in malignant cystic neoplasms, but low in non-neoplastic or benign neoplastic cysts. Having said that, ex‐ ceptions do occur and no standardized values exist among institutions. On cytology speci‐

pathological diagnosis.

aid in patient care.

ing this potentially complex problem.

Cases 7-8: also included in Table 5 are two cases of surgical-proven pancreatic pseudocyst that presented with grossly similar amber clear to brownish fluid on aspiration while con‐ current amylase and CEA level were in the normal range.


\* Both lymphoepithelial cyst (LEC) and pancreatic pseudocyst can grossly show amber clear fluid upon fine needle aspi‐ *ration. Fluid can also be thicker in texture and darker in color due to hemorrhagic changes.*

**Table 5.** Salient features of 3 cases of LEC and 2 cases of pancreatic pseudocyst.

Our experience tells us that being fully aware of the limitations on cytology diagnosis and the high possibility of non-representative sampling of the lesions, cytologists should be ready to reject or classify the specimens as non-diagnostic in many situations of acellular cytological material and thus avoid misleading the clinical decisions with an erroneous di‐ agnosis. On the other hand, based on the individual institute settings and the availabilities of cytopathologists for on-site immediate assessment, cytology diagnosis tends to ignore the gross appearance of the aspirated material and the background material is also often overlooked microscopically, especially in an acellular cytology specimen. Incorporating those gross material observations can sometimes add valuable information towards a pathological diagnosis.

**3.3. Pattern 3: Grossly amber clear fluid, can be darker due to thickness**

simple lymphoepithelial cysts with no sebaceous gland differentiation.

current amylase and CEA level were in the normal range.

Questionable mild chronic pancreatitis

3.4 cm wellcircumscribed radiolucent mass

Rare degenerated

Amylase:35 U/L; CA19-9:12 U/ml

*ration. Fluid can also be thicker in texture and darker in color due to hemorrhagic changes.*

**Table 5.** Salient features of 3 cases of LEC and 2 cases of pancreatic pseudocyst.

cells and proteinaceous debris

Surgical Diagnosis

296 Endoscopy

Clinical History

Imaging Study

Gross on EUS-

FNA

Lower quadrant colic pain for 9 months.

4.6 cm cystic lesion at the junction of pancreatic head and body

Clear light yellow fluid

and debris, no epithelium identified

24-354 U/L; CEA:25.6-34. 5 ng/ml CA19-9:8 U/ml

Cytology Dx Cystic contents

Lab Data Amylase:

Cases 4-6: a computer inventory search from year 1997-2007 at University of Washington al‐ lowed us to review three additional cases of lymphoepithelial cysts with cytological diagno‐ sis and follow-up surgical resections. The features of these 3 cases are summarized in Table 5. All those surgical-proven lymphoepithelial cysts showed grossly clear fluid on cytology aspiration with color variation described from light yellow to darker-brown. Available labo‐ ratory data showed low amylase and CEA level. The follow-up surgical specimens revealed

Cases 7-8: also included in Table 5 are two cases of surgical-proven pancreatic pseudocyst that presented with grossly similar amber clear to brownish fluid on aspiration while con‐

**Case 4 5 6 7 8**

LEC LEC LEC Pseudocyst Pseudocyst

Choledocolithiasis, s/p cholecystectomy and 3 weeks abdominal pain

4. 5 cm heterogeneous microcystic mass adjacent to the uncinate process

Degenerative and necrotic adipose tissue

\* Both lymphoepithelial cyst (LEC) and pancreatic pseudocyst can grossly show amber clear fluid upon fine needle aspi‐

Clear fluid No fluid obtained Serosanguinous fluid Brownish fluid

Amylase:13-53 U/L; Amylase:18-54 U/L;

Alcohol use; 10yr h/o epigastric pain

3.5 cm circumscribed, heterogenous pancreatic head mass

Inflammatory cells, hemosiderin pigment

and debris

CEA:3.1 ng/ml CA19-9:4.5-6.1 U/ml Alcohol use; liver cirrhosis and chronic pancreatitis

3.3 cm well demarcated, heterogeneous pancreatic head

Inflammatory cells and fragments of fibrous tissue

Amylase:12-15 U/L;

mass

Patient 35 yo M 42 yo F 51 yo M 42 yo F 60 yo F

We presented three entities (8 cases) here in an attempt to highlight the diagnostic value of gross appearance in fine needle aspiration cytology that can provide clues to the nature of a pancreatic or a peripancreatic cystic lesion. These three entities: biloma, pancreatic lym‐ phoepithelial cyst and pancreatic pseudocyst, although considered uncommon and not widely represented in the cytology literature, are actually encountered more commonly now with the rapid advance of our imaging and imaging guided-sampling practices. On cytology specimens, those are the lesions that generally produce acellular or sparsely cellu‐ lar material (not including carryover material from gastrointestinal luminal origin). How‐ ever by carefully combining the clinical, radiological, laboratory and cytological findings grossly and microscopically, cytology can help lead to or confirm clinical judgments and aid in patient care.

A biloma is an encapsulated bile collection outside the biliary tree. The underlying causes include iatrogenic, traumatic, and spontaneous injury of the biliary tree causing bile leaks. Its diagnosis can be established upon clinical history, imaging studies, and needle aspiration cytology and chemical analysis of the aspirated fluid. The symptomatic biloma if left un‐ treated may result in significant morbidity and mortality. However, non-surgical interven‐ tion is considered the first choice of treatment for biloma, especially in many asymptomatic situations. Alternatively symptomatic biloma may be treated successfully with intervention‐ al radiologic techniques instead of open surgery [54, 55]. It was recently reported that endo‐ scopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of an infected biloma, together with endoscopic biliary stent placement, resulted in complete resolution of a patient's biloma [56]. Thus, cytological diagnosis of biloma upon EUS-FNA can help a great deal in manag‐ ing this potentially complex problem.

A wide variety of cystic lesions can arise within or adjacent to the pancreas. They can be generally placed into non-neoplastic and neoplastic categories. The non-neoplastic cystic le‐ sions can be both congenital and acquired. EUS-FNA has emerged as the primary choice for obtaining diagnostic material on pancreatic cystic lesions. Aspirated cystic fluid analysis for pancreatic enzymes, tumor markers, and fluid viscosity can be of great help in the differen‐ tial diagnosis. Non-neoplastic cysts generally are high on amylase level and low on tumor markers (CEA, CA 19-9) while these tumor markers are generally elevated in malignant cystic neoplasms, but low in non-neoplastic or benign neoplastic cysts. Having said that, ex‐ ceptions do occur and no standardized values exist among institutions. On cytology speci‐ men, neoplastic cystic lesions usually produce a more cellular aspirate compared to nonneoplastic cysts if appropriately sampled.

controls. On the other hand, the presence of internal control material can sometimes add confusion rather than reassurance in ICC-stained material. Nevertheless, by carefully and strategically using the cytology specimen, immunocytochemical studies are often achievable with limited aspiration material. We have used some of the techniques that have been de‐ scribed by others, such as immunostaining over Papanicolaou-stained monolayer slides; ap‐ plying different antibodies to different areas of one smear slide; or making cell block preparations whenever possible. When unstained material is not available and no cell block is initially prepared, Dr. V. Grieco and her colleagues at Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, have used a scraped slide technique that transfers smear material on Papanico‐ laou stained slides into paraffin embedded cell blocks. The cell block can then be used for ICC with appropriate controls. If successful, this may avoid the necessity of obtaining addi‐ tional tissue. We have routinely used this scraped cell block technique in our daily practice as well as in research projects. We hereby briefly discuss our mucin study project with ar‐ chival cytology material from 1997-2007 at University of Washington, presented at Digestive Disease Week [62]. Schema of Scraping Technique is illustrated in Figure 3: scraping the ma‐

The Use of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Cytopathology Diagnosis

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52549

299

**Figure 3.** Schema of Scrapped Cell Block Technique:Papanicolaou-stained cellular direct smears are placed in xylene, coverslip removed, and re-hydrated in sequentially graded ethanol to tap water. The cellular material is then scraped from the glass slides using a razor blade, embedded in Histogel and processed with routine cell block preparation.

terial from rehydrated direct smear slides into a cell block preparation.

The acquired non-neoplastic pancreatic cysts include dermoid cysts, LECs and pseudocysts. Both dermoid cysts and LECs are squamous-lined non-neoplastic cysts. LECs are benign cystic lesions [57] seen predominantly in males, in the fifth to sixth decades of life. They may be unilocular or multilocular. The cyst contents may vary from serous to cheesy/casseousappearing material depending on the degree of keratin formation. Microscopically, the cysts are lined by well-differentiated stratified squamous epithelium, which may or may not have prominent keratinization. In some areas, the lining may appear more transitional, and in others, flat, cuboidal, or focally denuded. The squamous epithelium is surrounded by a band of dense lymphoid tissue composed of mature T-lymphocytes with intervening germi‐ nal centers formed by B cells. The representative aspirate findings are non-specific, showing a mixed population of lymphocytes, histiocytes in a background of keratin debris and pro‐ teinaceous debris. Squamous lining cells may be seen. The occurrence of sebaceous glands in LEC of pancreas is well documented [58]. It is unclear whether the florid sebaceous glandu‐ lar differentiation correlates with the exceedingly elevated CEA and amylase level in our pa‐ tient. LECs of the pancreas do not appear to be associated with any autoimmune conditions, human immunodeficiency virus infection, lymphoma, or carcinoma. All of these lesions have been documented to occur in their salivary gland counterparts [59]. Dermoid cysts are also rare in the pancreas region. They are reported in younger patients (2nd-3rd decades). The presence of sebaceous glands or hair follicles and absence of closely associated lymphoid tis‐ sue is more typical for dermoid cysts and differentiate them from LECs.

Pancreatic pseudocysts account for the vast majority (75-90%) of pancreatic cysts [60]. Pseu‐ docyst lacks an epithelial lining. It develops when a focus of peri-pancreatic fat necrosis is resorbed, producing a debris-filled space rich in pancreatic exocrine enzymes. It is in general composed of an inflammatory fibrous capsule surrounding a region of necrosis. However, the pathologic findings may vary depending on the stage of the process. The cyst contents, originally necrotic fat, transform into a mixture of necrotic cells, enzymes, scavenger cells, cholesterol clefts and sometimes neutrophils. The tissue that surrounds the necrotic material first produces granulation tissue, and eventually becomes a fibrotic pseudocapsule. FNA usually yields clear to dark brown fluid, which often but not always (as in our cases) shows elevated amylase level on fluid analysis. Aspirate smears are again non-specific and com‐ posed of granular necrotic debris and mixed inflammatory cells [61]. A clinical history of pancreatitis and confirmatory gross evidence of pancreatitis on imaging should confirm the diagnosis. The diagnosis of pseudocyst on cytology should be considered one of exclusion.

### **4. Aim 3: Application of immunocytochemistry (ICC) studies in EUS-FNA obtained cytology material**

When applying ancillary techniques in cytologic specimens, cytopathologists often encoun‐ ter the difficulties of limited material, lack of negative or positive controls or lack of internal controls. On the other hand, the presence of internal control material can sometimes add confusion rather than reassurance in ICC-stained material. Nevertheless, by carefully and strategically using the cytology specimen, immunocytochemical studies are often achievable with limited aspiration material. We have used some of the techniques that have been de‐ scribed by others, such as immunostaining over Papanicolaou-stained monolayer slides; ap‐ plying different antibodies to different areas of one smear slide; or making cell block preparations whenever possible. When unstained material is not available and no cell block is initially prepared, Dr. V. Grieco and her colleagues at Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, have used a scraped slide technique that transfers smear material on Papanico‐ laou stained slides into paraffin embedded cell blocks. The cell block can then be used for ICC with appropriate controls. If successful, this may avoid the necessity of obtaining addi‐ tional tissue. We have routinely used this scraped cell block technique in our daily practice as well as in research projects. We hereby briefly discuss our mucin study project with ar‐ chival cytology material from 1997-2007 at University of Washington, presented at Digestive Disease Week [62]. Schema of Scraping Technique is illustrated in Figure 3: scraping the ma‐ terial from rehydrated direct smear slides into a cell block preparation.

men, neoplastic cystic lesions usually produce a more cellular aspirate compared to non-

The acquired non-neoplastic pancreatic cysts include dermoid cysts, LECs and pseudocysts. Both dermoid cysts and LECs are squamous-lined non-neoplastic cysts. LECs are benign cystic lesions [57] seen predominantly in males, in the fifth to sixth decades of life. They may be unilocular or multilocular. The cyst contents may vary from serous to cheesy/casseousappearing material depending on the degree of keratin formation. Microscopically, the cysts are lined by well-differentiated stratified squamous epithelium, which may or may not have prominent keratinization. In some areas, the lining may appear more transitional, and in others, flat, cuboidal, or focally denuded. The squamous epithelium is surrounded by a band of dense lymphoid tissue composed of mature T-lymphocytes with intervening germi‐ nal centers formed by B cells. The representative aspirate findings are non-specific, showing a mixed population of lymphocytes, histiocytes in a background of keratin debris and pro‐ teinaceous debris. Squamous lining cells may be seen. The occurrence of sebaceous glands in LEC of pancreas is well documented [58]. It is unclear whether the florid sebaceous glandu‐ lar differentiation correlates with the exceedingly elevated CEA and amylase level in our pa‐ tient. LECs of the pancreas do not appear to be associated with any autoimmune conditions, human immunodeficiency virus infection, lymphoma, or carcinoma. All of these lesions have been documented to occur in their salivary gland counterparts [59]. Dermoid cysts are also rare in the pancreas region. They are reported in younger patients (2nd-3rd decades). The presence of sebaceous glands or hair follicles and absence of closely associated lymphoid tis‐

sue is more typical for dermoid cysts and differentiate them from LECs.

Pancreatic pseudocysts account for the vast majority (75-90%) of pancreatic cysts [60]. Pseu‐ docyst lacks an epithelial lining. It develops when a focus of peri-pancreatic fat necrosis is resorbed, producing a debris-filled space rich in pancreatic exocrine enzymes. It is in general composed of an inflammatory fibrous capsule surrounding a region of necrosis. However, the pathologic findings may vary depending on the stage of the process. The cyst contents, originally necrotic fat, transform into a mixture of necrotic cells, enzymes, scavenger cells, cholesterol clefts and sometimes neutrophils. The tissue that surrounds the necrotic material first produces granulation tissue, and eventually becomes a fibrotic pseudocapsule. FNA usually yields clear to dark brown fluid, which often but not always (as in our cases) shows elevated amylase level on fluid analysis. Aspirate smears are again non-specific and com‐ posed of granular necrotic debris and mixed inflammatory cells [61]. A clinical history of pancreatitis and confirmatory gross evidence of pancreatitis on imaging should confirm the diagnosis. The diagnosis of pseudocyst on cytology should be considered one of exclusion.

**4. Aim 3: Application of immunocytochemistry (ICC) studies in EUS-**

When applying ancillary techniques in cytologic specimens, cytopathologists often encoun‐ ter the difficulties of limited material, lack of negative or positive controls or lack of internal

**FNA obtained cytology material**

neoplastic cysts if appropriately sampled.

298 Endoscopy

**Figure 3.** Schema of Scrapped Cell Block Technique:Papanicolaou-stained cellular direct smears are placed in xylene, coverslip removed, and re-hydrated in sequentially graded ethanol to tap water. The cellular material is then scraped from the glass slides using a razor blade, embedded in Histogel and processed with routine cell block preparation.

Cytology diagnosis of mucin-producing pancreatic neoplasms including mucinous noncystic carcinoma (colloid carcinoma), mucinous cystic neoplasm, and intraductal papillarymucinous neoplasm (IPMN) is important because of the speculation that disruption of the integrity of these mucinous tumors by an incisional biopsy may cause dissemination of tu‐ mor cells with mucin and worsen the prognosis. Mucin-detection is not always an easy task on EUS-FNA specimen. Reactive/inflammatory pancreatitis can cause dilated ducts and‐ pseudocyst formation with proteinaceous precipitate that can be mistaken as mucinous ma‐ terial. Sheets of carry-over gastric foveolar cells can mimic cells from mucinous neoplasia [ 63-67]. By applying conventional cytochemistry including PAS (periodic acid-Schiff reac‐ tion), PASD (PAS with diastase), alcian blue and mucicarmin, in conjunction withmucin protein (MUC1, MUC2) immunostaining on surgical-proven cytology specimens, this study aims at selecting a practical diagnostic tool to enhance the diagnostic accuracy of detecting mucin-producing pancreatic neoplasms.

Studied material include: 1) Bench FNA specimens performed on autopsy or surgical-ob‐ tained normal tissue that are likely to be carried-over during an endoscopic procedure in‐ cluding pancreas, gastric body, pylorus and duodenum; 2) EUS-FNA (with scraped cell block preparation by scraping archival smears into a cell block), along with subsequent sur‐ gical specimens on mucinous cystadenoma, borderline mucinous cystic neoplasm, IPMN, colloid carcinoma and ductal adenocarcinma with mucin production; 3) Non-mucin produc‐ ing lesions including solid pseudopapillary tumor and chronic pancreatitis with dilated duct. Our data demonstrate that mucicarmin is very insensitive in detecting mucin produc‐ tion. We are unable to show reliable mucicarmin staining on both surgical and cytology specimen of IPMN(Figure 4, Panel D-F) as well as mucinous cystic neoplasia cases. MUC1 and MUC 2 immunostains do not consistently pick up mucin production by pancreatic neo‐ plasia on cytology specimens either. In contrast, PAS/PAS-Diastase are a reliable and sensi‐ tive marker to stain background mucin material and mucin-producing epithelial cells on cytology, yet specific enough to distinguish proteinaceous precipitate in a pancreatitis case (Figure 4, Panel A-C, precipitate in a dilated duct that was mistaken as possible mucinous material on cytology). The results have directed our daily practice on the use of mucin stains on cytologic diagnosis of pancreatic mucinous neoplasia.

Concomitant use of ICC can greatly enhance the diagnostic accuracy on cytology specimens, especially when it comes to the diagnostic entities invariably requiring immunophenotypic identification, such as in the diagnosis of pancreatic endocrine neoplasia (PENs) [68-72]. However, due to the initial unanticipated nature of the lesion, lack of cytopathologist on site or difficulties of the procedure, sufficient aspirate/biopsy material for cellblock preparation is not always available. By using the scraped cell block technique, a select panel of immuno‐ cytochemical studies can be achieved to aid in the diagnosis of PEN. Using the aforemen‐ tioned scraped cell block technique, figure 5 shows strong expression of the neuroendocrine immuno-marker, chromogranin, by the neoplastic cells. Figure 6 shows neoplastic cells stained positively with the neuroendocrine marker, synaptophysin by directly applying the antibody onto a Papanicolaou-stained charged monolayer slide.

**Figure 4.** In a case of IPMN, with negative staining for mucicarmine and MUC1, PASD highlighted the mucinous neo‐ plastic cells uniformly (panel D-F). Negative PASD staining in a pancreatitis case with precipitate in a dilated duct that

The Use of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Cytopathology Diagnosis

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52549

301

was mistaken as possible mucinous material on cytology initially (panel A-C).

Cytology diagnosis of mucin-producing pancreatic neoplasms including mucinous noncystic carcinoma (colloid carcinoma), mucinous cystic neoplasm, and intraductal papillarymucinous neoplasm (IPMN) is important because of the speculation that disruption of the integrity of these mucinous tumors by an incisional biopsy may cause dissemination of tu‐ mor cells with mucin and worsen the prognosis. Mucin-detection is not always an easy task on EUS-FNA specimen. Reactive/inflammatory pancreatitis can cause dilated ducts and‐ pseudocyst formation with proteinaceous precipitate that can be mistaken as mucinous ma‐ terial. Sheets of carry-over gastric foveolar cells can mimic cells from mucinous neoplasia [ 63-67]. By applying conventional cytochemistry including PAS (periodic acid-Schiff reac‐ tion), PASD (PAS with diastase), alcian blue and mucicarmin, in conjunction withmucin protein (MUC1, MUC2) immunostaining on surgical-proven cytology specimens, this study aims at selecting a practical diagnostic tool to enhance the diagnostic accuracy of detecting

Studied material include: 1) Bench FNA specimens performed on autopsy or surgical-ob‐ tained normal tissue that are likely to be carried-over during an endoscopic procedure in‐ cluding pancreas, gastric body, pylorus and duodenum; 2) EUS-FNA (with scraped cell block preparation by scraping archival smears into a cell block), along with subsequent sur‐ gical specimens on mucinous cystadenoma, borderline mucinous cystic neoplasm, IPMN, colloid carcinoma and ductal adenocarcinma with mucin production; 3) Non-mucin produc‐ ing lesions including solid pseudopapillary tumor and chronic pancreatitis with dilated duct. Our data demonstrate that mucicarmin is very insensitive in detecting mucin produc‐ tion. We are unable to show reliable mucicarmin staining on both surgical and cytology specimen of IPMN(Figure 4, Panel D-F) as well as mucinous cystic neoplasia cases. MUC1 and MUC 2 immunostains do not consistently pick up mucin production by pancreatic neo‐ plasia on cytology specimens either. In contrast, PAS/PAS-Diastase are a reliable and sensi‐ tive marker to stain background mucin material and mucin-producing epithelial cells on cytology, yet specific enough to distinguish proteinaceous precipitate in a pancreatitis case (Figure 4, Panel A-C, precipitate in a dilated duct that was mistaken as possible mucinous material on cytology). The results have directed our daily practice on the use of mucin stains

Concomitant use of ICC can greatly enhance the diagnostic accuracy on cytology specimens, especially when it comes to the diagnostic entities invariably requiring immunophenotypic identification, such as in the diagnosis of pancreatic endocrine neoplasia (PENs) [68-72]. However, due to the initial unanticipated nature of the lesion, lack of cytopathologist on site or difficulties of the procedure, sufficient aspirate/biopsy material for cellblock preparation is not always available. By using the scraped cell block technique, a select panel of immuno‐ cytochemical studies can be achieved to aid in the diagnosis of PEN. Using the aforemen‐ tioned scraped cell block technique, figure 5 shows strong expression of the neuroendocrine immuno-marker, chromogranin, by the neoplastic cells. Figure 6 shows neoplastic cells stained positively with the neuroendocrine marker, synaptophysin by directly applying the

mucin-producing pancreatic neoplasms.

300 Endoscopy

on cytologic diagnosis of pancreatic mucinous neoplasia.

antibody onto a Papanicolaou-stained charged monolayer slide.

**Figure 4.** In a case of IPMN, with negative staining for mucicarmine and MUC1, PASD highlighted the mucinous neo‐ plastic cells uniformly (panel D-F). Negative PASD staining in a pancreatitis case with precipitate in a dilated duct that was mistaken as possible mucinous material on cytology initially (panel A-C).

Before leaving this section, it should also be stated that in cytology, as in surgical pathology, the light microscopic appearance of the tumor is more important than a particular staining result and that immunocytochemistry should be used for confirmation of the cytomorpho‐ logical diagnosis. Be aware of that the staining of cytology specimens is often focal and sometimes difficult to interpret, because of various factors, including limited material, high background staining, and the presence of three-dimensional clusters with non-specific stain‐ ing and edge artifact. A combined clinical, radiographic and pathologic approach should al‐

The Use of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Cytopathology Diagnosis

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52549

303

**5. Aim 4: EUS-FNA as a source of material for molecular studies**

also well documented molecular tests using cytology specimens.

low cost, prompt access and the avoidance of surgery.

We are at the beginning of the era of clinical application of molecular probes to assess genet‐ ic alterations. Many assays have become clinically available in identifying genetic alterations that serve as prognostic markers and therapeutic targets. EGFR expression in head and neck cancers, non-small cell lung carcinomas, colon cancers, and recently in pancreatic cancers [73-82]; microsatellite instability tests in colon cancer serve as prognostic marker, therapeu‐ tic predictive marker and screening test for Lynch syndrome [83-88] are among the most studied areas. Immunodetection of molecular markers on cytology specimen, especially in cancer staging for metastatic disease will be playing a major role as a guide for moleculartargeted therapy. EGFR expression has now been routinely assessed on cell block cytology specimens by many of the commercial or academic laboratories. A prominent example in this regard is FNA diagnosis of thyroid nodules. Given that the cytology reports on thyroid FNA diagnoses are often indeterminate or suspicious, the potential use of diagnostic molec‐ ular markers as adjunct methods for cytologic diagnosis appears to be among the most promising area of research [89-98]. Fluorescent (FISH) and chromogenic (CISH) in situ hy‐ bridization have recently become part of the diagnostic armamentarium of breast patholo‐ gists. HER2 gene amplification testing by FISH and/or CISH has become an integral part of the diagnostic workup for patients with breast cancer [99-105 ]. FISH or CISH is now used in FNA material with success in many situations, including HER2 assessment in FNA with ex‐ cellent correlation with the histologic specimens [106-108 ]. Many other applications, such as N-myc amplication on FNA from neuroblastomas [109, 110] and potential use of multiplex FISH for detection of recurrence of transitional carcinomas on urine specimens [111-114] are

Compared to paraffin-embedded tissue, cytology specimens offer the advantage of disag‐ gregated, intact cells, with fewer problems associated with tumor cell homogenization. FISH or CISH probe for diagnosis should be expected to be detected more accurately in cytologic specimen as it contains whole cells and whole nuclei. For the patient, the advantages include

In carcinogenesis, the majority of molecular alterations occur prior to progressive tumor growth. It has been well documented that resection of small (early) pancreatic tumors and tu‐ mors of low histological or cytological grade and stage are correlated with improved survival.

ways be emphasized in rendering each diagnosis.

**Figure 5.** Immunocytochemical stain on a scraped cellblock section displaying strong expression of neuroendocrine marker, Chromogranin by the neoplastic cells (Scraped material for cell block preparation, 400x).

**Figure 6.** Neoplastic cells on a monolayer slide stained positively with neuroendocrine marker, synaptophysin anti‐ body (400x)

Before leaving this section, it should also be stated that in cytology, as in surgical pathology, the light microscopic appearance of the tumor is more important than a particular staining result and that immunocytochemistry should be used for confirmation of the cytomorpho‐ logical diagnosis. Be aware of that the staining of cytology specimens is often focal and sometimes difficult to interpret, because of various factors, including limited material, high background staining, and the presence of three-dimensional clusters with non-specific stain‐ ing and edge artifact. A combined clinical, radiographic and pathologic approach should al‐ ways be emphasized in rendering each diagnosis.

### **5. Aim 4: EUS-FNA as a source of material for molecular studies**

**Figure 5.** Immunocytochemical stain on a scraped cellblock section displaying strong expression of neuroendocrine

**Figure 6.** Neoplastic cells on a monolayer slide stained positively with neuroendocrine marker, synaptophysin anti‐

body (400x)

302 Endoscopy

marker, Chromogranin by the neoplastic cells (Scraped material for cell block preparation, 400x).

We are at the beginning of the era of clinical application of molecular probes to assess genet‐ ic alterations. Many assays have become clinically available in identifying genetic alterations that serve as prognostic markers and therapeutic targets. EGFR expression in head and neck cancers, non-small cell lung carcinomas, colon cancers, and recently in pancreatic cancers [73-82]; microsatellite instability tests in colon cancer serve as prognostic marker, therapeu‐ tic predictive marker and screening test for Lynch syndrome [83-88] are among the most studied areas. Immunodetection of molecular markers on cytology specimen, especially in cancer staging for metastatic disease will be playing a major role as a guide for moleculartargeted therapy. EGFR expression has now been routinely assessed on cell block cytology specimens by many of the commercial or academic laboratories. A prominent example in this regard is FNA diagnosis of thyroid nodules. Given that the cytology reports on thyroid FNA diagnoses are often indeterminate or suspicious, the potential use of diagnostic molec‐ ular markers as adjunct methods for cytologic diagnosis appears to be among the most promising area of research [89-98]. Fluorescent (FISH) and chromogenic (CISH) in situ hy‐ bridization have recently become part of the diagnostic armamentarium of breast patholo‐ gists. HER2 gene amplification testing by FISH and/or CISH has become an integral part of the diagnostic workup for patients with breast cancer [99-105 ]. FISH or CISH is now used in FNA material with success in many situations, including HER2 assessment in FNA with ex‐ cellent correlation with the histologic specimens [106-108 ]. Many other applications, such as N-myc amplication on FNA from neuroblastomas [109, 110] and potential use of multiplex FISH for detection of recurrence of transitional carcinomas on urine specimens [111-114] are also well documented molecular tests using cytology specimens.

Compared to paraffin-embedded tissue, cytology specimens offer the advantage of disag‐ gregated, intact cells, with fewer problems associated with tumor cell homogenization. FISH or CISH probe for diagnosis should be expected to be detected more accurately in cytologic specimen as it contains whole cells and whole nuclei. For the patient, the advantages include low cost, prompt access and the avoidance of surgery.

In carcinogenesis, the majority of molecular alterations occur prior to progressive tumor growth. It has been well documented that resection of small (early) pancreatic tumors and tu‐ mors of low histological or cytological grade and stage are correlated with improved survival. It is, therefore, important to identify these tumors in their early stages. DNA methylation changes are an early event in carcinogenesis and are often present in the precursor lesions of various cancers. Dr. N. Kiviat's lab at Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, has published extensively in constructing a panel of candidate hypermethylated genes with opti‐ mal sensitivity and specificity as a potential screening tool for cervical neoplasia, ovarian car‐ cinoma and lung cancer [115-118]. In collaboration with Dr. N. Kiviat's lab, we performed molecular tests on EUS-FNA of pancreatic lesions in the form of remains in liquid-based prep‐ aration, together with bench-performed mock FNA from normal pancreas obtained through Harborview trauma center. We preliminarily tested the hypothesis that a panel of hyperme‐ thylated genes with high sensitivity and specificity for pancreatic adenocarcinoma might in‐ crease the accuracy of diagnosis of FNA and brush cytology on pancreatic cancer.

**Results** A total of 17 samples were available for examination. No DNA remained in one bile duct brushing after preparation of smears for microscopic examination. Thus, 16 samples, 12 malignant and 4 benign (by histology) were evaluated. On microscopic examination of the FNA and brush cytologic specimens, 8 of the 12 samples which were later shown to be ma‐ lignant (on biopsy) were classified as "suspicious" for malignancy while four were called definitively "positive" for malignancy by FNA or brush. The remaining four cases were his‐ tologically benign. Two of these cases were called "negative" on microscopic examination of the FNA or brush specimen, one was classified as "atypical" and one as "suspicious for ma‐ lignancy". The distribution of aberrantly methylated genes of interest among the benign and

The Use of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Cytopathology Diagnosis

**Benign (n=4)**

**UCHL1** 9 (75%) 1 (25%) 6 (50%) 0 (0%)

**APC** 7 (58%) 1 (25%) 3 (25%) 0 (0%)

**RASSF1** 3 (25%) 0 (0%) 2 (17%) 0 (0%)

**IGSF4** 3 (25%) 0 (0%) 1 (8%) 0 (0%)

**CDH13** 8 (67%) 0 (0%) 3 (25%) 0 (0%)

**CCND2** 10 (83%) 4 (100%) 8 (67%) 2 (50%)

**CDKN2A** 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Methylation of three different genes (RASSF1, IGSF4, and CDH13) was present at some level in malignant but not benign samples, and methylation of two other genes (UCHL1 and APC) was present at a higher frequency in the majority of malignant samples but was present in only one of four benign samples. For two genes, methylation was either present in nearly all samples, regardless of histologic diagnosis (CCND2) or was not present in any samples (CDKN2A). For five genes, high levels of methylation (PMR≥4%) were present in malignant cases but were not detected in any of the benign samples. We next identified the combination of genes with the highest sensitivity and specificity for pancreatic cancer.

**High Methylation (PMR≥4%)**

(67%) (0%)

**Benign (n=4)**

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52549

305

**Malignant (n=12)**

malignant lesions is presented in Table 7.

**Malignant (n=12)**

**CDH13 or RASSF1** (75%) 0%)

**Table 7.** Promoter Hypermethylation by Histologic Diagnosis

**Any Methylation (PMR>0%)**

**Gene**

**UCHL1, CDH13, or**

**RASSF1**

**Method** Excess material from five pancreatic FNAs, three pancreatic duct brushings and nine bile duct brushings from patients who subsequently had histologic evaluation upon surgery were studied. Genomic DNA was isolated from residual cytology brushing sample pellets using QIAamp Blood DNA isolation kit and methylation status of seven genes, was accessed using MethyLight assay after bisulfite conversion [115]. These genes were reported to be frequently methylated in other cancers, including RASSF1A (Ras association domain family 1A gene), UCHL1 (ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal esterase L1), APC (adenomatosis pol‐ yposis coli), IGSF4 (also called CADM1, cell adhesion molecule 1), CDH13 (cadherin 13), CCND2 (cyclin D2), and CDKN2A (cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A, p16). Primers and probes for these genes are listed in Table 6. Sample adequacy after bisulfite conversion was determined by amplification of β-actin gene (ACTB). The percentage of methylated refer‐ ence (PMR) for each gene was calculated as before [115]. The methylation status of a sample was categorized in two ways: as having any methylation present (PMR>0) and as having high levels of methylation (PMR≥4%), as previously described [115].


**Table 6.** Primers and probes for MethyLight assays

**Results** A total of 17 samples were available for examination. No DNA remained in one bile duct brushing after preparation of smears for microscopic examination. Thus, 16 samples, 12 malignant and 4 benign (by histology) were evaluated. On microscopic examination of the FNA and brush cytologic specimens, 8 of the 12 samples which were later shown to be ma‐ lignant (on biopsy) were classified as "suspicious" for malignancy while four were called definitively "positive" for malignancy by FNA or brush. The remaining four cases were his‐ tologically benign. Two of these cases were called "negative" on microscopic examination of the FNA or brush specimen, one was classified as "atypical" and one as "suspicious for ma‐ lignancy". The distribution of aberrantly methylated genes of interest among the benign and malignant lesions is presented in Table 7.


**Table 7.** Promoter Hypermethylation by Histologic Diagnosis

It is, therefore, important to identify these tumors in their early stages. DNA methylation changes are an early event in carcinogenesis and are often present in the precursor lesions of various cancers. Dr. N. Kiviat's lab at Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, has published extensively in constructing a panel of candidate hypermethylated genes with opti‐ mal sensitivity and specificity as a potential screening tool for cervical neoplasia, ovarian car‐ cinoma and lung cancer [115-118]. In collaboration with Dr. N. Kiviat's lab, we performed molecular tests on EUS-FNA of pancreatic lesions in the form of remains in liquid-based prep‐ aration, together with bench-performed mock FNA from normal pancreas obtained through Harborview trauma center. We preliminarily tested the hypothesis that a panel of hyperme‐ thylated genes with high sensitivity and specificity for pancreatic adenocarcinoma might in‐

crease the accuracy of diagnosis of FNA and brush cytology on pancreatic cancer.

high levels of methylation (PMR≥4%), as previously described [115].

6FAM-

TAMRA

APC TTATATGTCGGTTACGTGCGTTTATAT 6FAM-CCCGTCGAAAACCCGCCGATTA-TAMRA GAACCAAAACGCTCCCCAT CCND2 CGTGTTAGGGTCGATCGTGTT 6FAM-ACTACGATAAAATCGCCG-MGB CTCGCCAAACTTTCTCCCTAAA CDH13 GATTTTTGGGTTCGGAATGATTT 6FAM-TTTTCGTCGTCGCGATC-MGB ATCGCCCGACACGAACAA CDKN2A TGGAGTTTTCGGTTGATTGGTT 6FAM-ACCCGACCCCGAACCGCG-TAMRA AACAACGCCCGCACCTCCT IGSF4 AGGGAGCGAGGTTTTTCGA 6FAM-CGAACCCAACCCGAC-MGB ACGAAATCCGAACAAACCAATC RASSF1 TAGGTTTTTATTGCGCGGTTTT 6FAM-CGCGAACCGAACGAA-MGB TACTTCGCTAACTTTAAACGCTAACAA

UCHL1 TCGCGAAGATGTAGTTTAAGTCGAT 6FAM-ACGCTCACCTCGAAAT-MGB CGCGCTCTCCGAATAACG

ACTB TGGTGATGGAGGAGGTTTAGTAAGT

304 Endoscopy

**Table 6.** Primers and probes for MethyLight assays

**Method** Excess material from five pancreatic FNAs, three pancreatic duct brushings and nine bile duct brushings from patients who subsequently had histologic evaluation upon surgery were studied. Genomic DNA was isolated from residual cytology brushing sample pellets using QIAamp Blood DNA isolation kit and methylation status of seven genes, was accessed using MethyLight assay after bisulfite conversion [115]. These genes were reported to be frequently methylated in other cancers, including RASSF1A (Ras association domain family 1A gene), UCHL1 (ubiquitin carboxyl-terminal esterase L1), APC (adenomatosis pol‐ yposis coli), IGSF4 (also called CADM1, cell adhesion molecule 1), CDH13 (cadherin 13), CCND2 (cyclin D2), and CDKN2A (cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A, p16). Primers and probes for these genes are listed in Table 6. Sample adequacy after bisulfite conversion was determined by amplification of β-actin gene (ACTB). The percentage of methylated refer‐ ence (PMR) for each gene was calculated as before [115]. The methylation status of a sample was categorized in two ways: as having any methylation present (PMR>0) and as having

**Gene Forward primer (5'-3') Probe (5'-3') Reverse primer (5'-3')**

ACCACCACCCAACACACAATAACAAACACA-

AACCAATAAAACCTACTCCTCCCTTAA

Methylation of three different genes (RASSF1, IGSF4, and CDH13) was present at some level in malignant but not benign samples, and methylation of two other genes (UCHL1 and APC) was present at a higher frequency in the majority of malignant samples but was present in only one of four benign samples. For two genes, methylation was either present in nearly all samples, regardless of histologic diagnosis (CCND2) or was not present in any samples (CDKN2A). For five genes, high levels of methylation (PMR≥4%) were present in malignant cases but were not detected in any of the benign samples. We next identified the combination of genes with the highest sensitivity and specificity for pancreatic cancer. When any level of methylation was considered as positive, aberrant methylation of CDH13 or RASSF1 provided optimal sensitivity and specificity for cancer, being present in 75% of malignant and 0% of benign specimens (Table 7). Considering high levels of methylation (PMR≥4%), the most sensitive and specific combination of methylated genes was UCHL1, CDH13 and RASSF1 which were positive in 67% of malignant but 0% of benign specimens (Table 7). Next we examined, whether detection of aberrantly methylated genes might in‐ crease our ability to accurately classify FNA and brush specimens as "positive" or "nega‐ tive" for malignancy. Using this approach, FNA and brush specimens were classified as "Positive for malignancy" if *either* cells with malignant morphologic changes *or* any level of methylation of CDH13 or RASSF1 was present (Table 8). Specimens were called "Nega‐ tive for malignancy" if the cells were morphologically normal *or cells were atypical or suspi‐ cious by morphology but* there was no evidence of aberrant methylation of either CDH13 or RASSF1. This algorithm detects 83% of malignant samples while maintaining 100% specif‐ icity. We are aware that an independent sample set is necessary to appropriately test this algorithm; however, this pilot data suggests that a panel of hypermethylated tumor sup‐ pressor genes might be useful in distinguishing malignancy from benign pancreatic le‐ sions. A similarly sensitive and specific algorithm combining cytologic morphology and a panel of genes methylated at high levels (PMR ≥4% of UCHL1, CDH13 and/or RASSF1 present) was also developed.

pilot data holds promise for further research to conduct a genome wide search for addition‐ al aberrantly methylated genes with high sensitivity and specificity for pancreatic cancer and which are not methylated in other tissues (such as colon, liver, stomach, duodenum) which can be frequently or incidentally present as carry-over material in FNA and brush

The Use of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Cytopathology Diagnosis

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52549

307

A 67-year-old woman was found to have a large retroperitoneal mass of uncertain etiology. The mass appears to invade the inferior vena cava and renal vein. Two prior attempts of CT and ultrasound guided biopsy were non-diagnostic due to the biopsy specimen consisting predominantly of necrotic tissue. Endoscopic ultrasound and enteroscopy were requested to

In the initial effort of EUS-FNA, rare clusters of neoplastic cells having round nuclear con‐ tour, mild nuclear crowding and overlapping, vesicular chromatin pattern, and distinct nu‐ cleoli are noted in a background of extensive necrosis and blood. Fresh material sent for flow cytometry analysis contained an abnormal CD56- and EpCAM-positive population. Abnormal B or T cell populations were not identified. A cytologic impression was issued as: Positive for neoplasm with features suggestive of neuroendocrine origin. Before implement‐ ing chemotherapy as neuroendocrine tumor, our astute clinician ordered indiumIII octreo‐ tide scan for clinical correlation and found no evidence of focal radiotracer uptake in the abdominal mass. The diagnosis was subsequently felt not sufficiently conclusive for therapy as neuroendocrine neoplasia. A repeat biopsy was requested. During the second attempt of EUS-FNA, there was extrinsic appearing compression at the second, third, and fourth por‐ tions of the duodenum with no evidence of mucosal lesions or ulcerations. A large (greater than 12 cm) heterogeneous hypoechoic mass lesion was identified adjacent to the head and neck of the pancreas. One component of the mass appeared to be cystic (Figure 7, panel A, with needle inside the cystic area), and a more solid component was also identified (Figure 7, panel B). The former was sampled with FNA, the latter with a core biopsy. Nine total

Pass 2 (core biopsy):Blood, necrotic material and sheets of bland epithelium. Additional di‐

**6. Aim 5: Achieving the full value of EUS-FNA with an integrated**

specimens from pancreatic lesions.

**approach: A EUS-FNA case study**

re-evaluate the lesion and re-attempt biopsy.

FNA passes were obtained with on-site immediate interpretation: Pass 1 (core biopsy):Blood and necrotic material, non-diagnostic.

Pass 3 (needle aspirate):Chiefly blood with atypical cells present.

agnostic material requested.

Pass 4 (needle aspirate):Chiefly blood.

Pass 5 (needle aspirate):Chiefly blood.

Pass 6 (needle aspirate):Placed directly into saline.


**Table 8.** Cytology or Any Methylation (PMR>0%) vs. Histology

**Conclusions.** Although the present study was limited by the fact that we were not able to test these algorithms in an independent sample, it appears that FNA and brush cytologic specimens can be more accurately classified as positive or negative for pancreatic cancer by including methylation analysis of tumor suppressor genes.

The variable mixture of tumor cells and normal cells is a major challenge when it comes to the molecular analysis of diagnostic or therapeutic targets in cytologic specimens. Cytolo‐ gists are needed to play an active role in the adoption and application of molecular techni‐ ques, since we are able to interpret the results in the light of cytological morphology. Our pilot data holds promise for further research to conduct a genome wide search for addition‐ al aberrantly methylated genes with high sensitivity and specificity for pancreatic cancer and which are not methylated in other tissues (such as colon, liver, stomach, duodenum) which can be frequently or incidentally present as carry-over material in FNA and brush specimens from pancreatic lesions.

### **6. Aim 5: Achieving the full value of EUS-FNA with an integrated approach: A EUS-FNA case study**

A 67-year-old woman was found to have a large retroperitoneal mass of uncertain etiology. The mass appears to invade the inferior vena cava and renal vein. Two prior attempts of CT and ultrasound guided biopsy were non-diagnostic due to the biopsy specimen consisting predominantly of necrotic tissue. Endoscopic ultrasound and enteroscopy were requested to re-evaluate the lesion and re-attempt biopsy.

In the initial effort of EUS-FNA, rare clusters of neoplastic cells having round nuclear con‐ tour, mild nuclear crowding and overlapping, vesicular chromatin pattern, and distinct nu‐ cleoli are noted in a background of extensive necrosis and blood. Fresh material sent for flow cytometry analysis contained an abnormal CD56- and EpCAM-positive population. Abnormal B or T cell populations were not identified. A cytologic impression was issued as: Positive for neoplasm with features suggestive of neuroendocrine origin. Before implement‐ ing chemotherapy as neuroendocrine tumor, our astute clinician ordered indiumIII octreo‐ tide scan for clinical correlation and found no evidence of focal radiotracer uptake in the abdominal mass. The diagnosis was subsequently felt not sufficiently conclusive for therapy as neuroendocrine neoplasia. A repeat biopsy was requested. During the second attempt of EUS-FNA, there was extrinsic appearing compression at the second, third, and fourth por‐ tions of the duodenum with no evidence of mucosal lesions or ulcerations. A large (greater than 12 cm) heterogeneous hypoechoic mass lesion was identified adjacent to the head and neck of the pancreas. One component of the mass appeared to be cystic (Figure 7, panel A, with needle inside the cystic area), and a more solid component was also identified (Figure 7, panel B). The former was sampled with FNA, the latter with a core biopsy. Nine total FNA passes were obtained with on-site immediate interpretation:

Pass 1 (core biopsy):Blood and necrotic material, non-diagnostic.

Pass 2 (core biopsy):Blood, necrotic material and sheets of bland epithelium. Additional di‐ agnostic material requested.

Pass 3 (needle aspirate):Chiefly blood with atypical cells present.

Pass 4 (needle aspirate):Chiefly blood.

When any level of methylation was considered as positive, aberrant methylation of CDH13 or RASSF1 provided optimal sensitivity and specificity for cancer, being present in 75% of malignant and 0% of benign specimens (Table 7). Considering high levels of methylation (PMR≥4%), the most sensitive and specific combination of methylated genes was UCHL1, CDH13 and RASSF1 which were positive in 67% of malignant but 0% of benign specimens (Table 7). Next we examined, whether detection of aberrantly methylated genes might in‐ crease our ability to accurately classify FNA and brush specimens as "positive" or "nega‐ tive" for malignancy. Using this approach, FNA and brush specimens were classified as "Positive for malignancy" if *either* cells with malignant morphologic changes *or* any level of methylation of CDH13 or RASSF1 was present (Table 8). Specimens were called "Nega‐ tive for malignancy" if the cells were morphologically normal *or cells were atypical or suspi‐ cious by morphology but* there was no evidence of aberrant methylation of either CDH13 or RASSF1. This algorithm detects 83% of malignant samples while maintaining 100% specif‐ icity. We are aware that an independent sample set is necessary to appropriately test this algorithm; however, this pilot data suggests that a panel of hypermethylated tumor sup‐ pressor genes might be useful in distinguishing malignancy from benign pancreatic le‐ sions. A similarly sensitive and specific algorithm combining cytologic morphology and a panel of genes methylated at high levels (PMR ≥4% of UCHL1, CDH13 and/or RASSF1

**Final Diagnosis Malignant**

morphology consistent with malignancy 4 (33%) 0 (0%) or aberrant methylation of CDH13 9 (75%) 0 (0%) or aberrant methylation of RASSF1 10 (83%) 0 (0%)

Negative morphology or 2 (50%) Atypical or suspicious cell morphology but no aberrant methylation of CDH13 or RASSF1 4 (100%)

**Conclusions.** Although the present study was limited by the fact that we were not able to test these algorithms in an independent sample, it appears that FNA and brush cytologic specimens can be more accurately classified as positive or negative for pancreatic cancer by

The variable mixture of tumor cells and normal cells is a major challenge when it comes to the molecular analysis of diagnostic or therapeutic targets in cytologic specimens. Cytolo‐ gists are needed to play an active role in the adoption and application of molecular techni‐ ques, since we are able to interpret the results in the light of cytological morphology. Our

**(n=12)**

**Benign (n=4)**

present) was also developed.

**Table 8.** Cytology or Any Methylation (PMR>0%) vs. Histology

including methylation analysis of tumor suppressor genes.

**POSITIVE**

306 Endoscopy

**NEGATIVE**

Pass 5 (needle aspirate):Chiefly blood.

Pass 6 (needle aspirate):Placed directly into saline.

Pass 7 (needle aspirate):Atypical cells present, defer to permanents.

Pass 8 (needle aspirate):Atypical cells present, defer to permanents.

Pass 9 (needle aspirate):Placed directly into saline for cell block preparation.

Many clusters of viable cells were obtained during the second attempt of EUS-FNA, display‐ ing cytological features including three dimensional clusters, loose monolayer and individu‐ al monotonous cells, microfollicular pattern and nuclear grooves (coffee bean-like nuclei). The tumor cells are uniform and lack nuclear hyperchromasia and pleomorphism (Figure 7, panel C-E). Given the ample material obtained, a cell block was prepared and a more com‐ plete panel of antibodies for ICC was able to be performed, with the following results (19 antibody stains performed on cytology specimen, figure 7, panels E, F):


**Figure 7.** EUS-FNA diagnosis of granulosa cell tumor. A heterogeneous hypoechoic mass lesion identified by EUS. One component of the mass appearsto be cystic (panel A, with needle inside the cystic area); A more solid component (panel B); Ample viable material obtained on repeat EUS-FNA (panel C, Pap smear 100 x); Cytomorphology of neoplas‐ tic cells on smear (panel D, oil immersion, 1000 x); Cytomorphology of neoplastic cells on cell block section (panel E, oil

The Use of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Cytopathology Diagnosis

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52549

309

The combined cytologic and immunophenotypic profile leads to the following final diagnosis:

**Retroperitoneal mass, endoscopic ultrasound-guided FNA: Consistent with metastatic/**

immersion, 1000 x); Application of inhibin antibody on cell block section (panel F, 400 x).

**recurrent granulosa cell tumor. See comment.**

**Table 9.**

The Use of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Cytopathology Diagnosis http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52549 309

Pass 7 (needle aspirate):Atypical cells present, defer to permanents.

Pass 8 (needle aspirate):Atypical cells present, defer to permanents.

Pass 9 (needle aspirate):Placed directly into saline for cell block preparation.

antibody stains performed on cytology specimen, figure 7, panels E, F):

**Antibody Results**

CALRETININ Positive CD10 Negative CD34 Negative

CD68/KP-1 Negative

DESMIN Negative S100 Negative CHROMOGRANIN Negative SYNAPTOPHYSIN Negative C-KIT Negative

AE1/AE3 Positive, focally

CD56 Positive, uniformly

1A4 Positive, focally

INHIBIN Positive, uniformly

NSE Positive, focally

ER (clone 1D5) Negative ER (clone SP1) Positive

**Table 9.**

308 Endoscopy

MELAN A Negative CD45 (T200) Negative EMA Negative

Many clusters of viable cells were obtained during the second attempt of EUS-FNA, display‐ ing cytological features including three dimensional clusters, loose monolayer and individu‐ al monotonous cells, microfollicular pattern and nuclear grooves (coffee bean-like nuclei). The tumor cells are uniform and lack nuclear hyperchromasia and pleomorphism (Figure 7, panel C-E). Given the ample material obtained, a cell block was prepared and a more com‐ plete panel of antibodies for ICC was able to be performed, with the following results (19

**Figure 7.** EUS-FNA diagnosis of granulosa cell tumor. A heterogeneous hypoechoic mass lesion identified by EUS. One component of the mass appearsto be cystic (panel A, with needle inside the cystic area); A more solid component (panel B); Ample viable material obtained on repeat EUS-FNA (panel C, Pap smear 100 x); Cytomorphology of neoplas‐ tic cells on smear (panel D, oil immersion, 1000 x); Cytomorphology of neoplastic cells on cell block section (panel E, oil immersion, 1000 x); Application of inhibin antibody on cell block section (panel F, 400 x).

The combined cytologic and immunophenotypic profile leads to the following final diagnosis:

**Retroperitoneal mass, endoscopic ultrasound-guided FNA: Consistent with metastatic/ recurrent granulosa cell tumor. See comment.**

**Comment:** The cytologic appearance of this tumor, along with the overall immuno-pheno‐ type demonstrated by calretinin and inhibin positivity, supports the diagnosis of granulo‐ sa cell tumor. Additional studies performed at PhenoPath Laboratory using the more sensitive anti-ER antibody SP1 document expression of estrogen receptor (in contrast to the negative anti-ER studies using the 1D5 clone), further supporting the diagnosis of granulosa cell tumor.

**Author details**

USA

**References**

244-9.

2011 May;23Suppl 1:29-33.

2010 Feb;21(1):35-43.

2009 Jun;3(2):116-21.

2011;55(1):26-9.

Lee-Ching Zhu1\*, Qinghua Feng2

\*Address all correspondence to: zhu.c@ghc.org

and Verena S. Grieco3

The Use of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Cytopathology Diagnosis

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52549

311

2 Department of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA,

[1] Rosch T, Lightdale CJ, Botet JF, et al:Localization of pancreatic endocrine tumors by

[2] Voss M, Hammel P, Molas G, et al:Value of endoscopic ultrasound guided fine nee‐ dle aspiration biopsy in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses. Gut.Feb 2000;46(2):

[3] Yoshinaga S, Suzuki H, Oda I, Saito Y:Role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses.Dig Endosc;

[4] Zhang S, Defrias DV, Alasadi R, Nayar R:Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA): experience of an academic centre in the USA. Cytopathology;

[5] Hwang CY, Lee SS, Song TJ, Moon SH, Lee D, Park do H, Seo DW, Lee SK, Kim MH:Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in diagnosis of pan‐ creatic and peripancreatic lesions: a single center experience in Korea. Gut Liver;

[6] Raddaoui E:Clinical utility and diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic lesions: Saudi Arabian experience.ActaCytol;

[7] Fisher L, Segarajasingam DS, Stewart C, Deboer WB, Yusoff IF:Endoscopic ultra‐ sound guided fine needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: Performance and

[8] Nakahara O, Yamao K, Bhatia V, Sawaki A, Mizuno N, Takagi T, Shimizu Y, Koshi‐ kawa T, Yatabe Y, Baba H:Usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle

outcomes.J GastroenterolHepatol; 2009 Jan;24(1):90-6.

1 Anatomic Pathology, Group Health Permanente, Seattle, WA, USA

3 Harborview Medical Center, Anatomic Pathology, Seattle, WA, USA

endoscopic ultrasonography. N Engl J Med.1992;326(26):1721-26.

After the diagnosis, patient recalls that she had a procedure for granulosa cell tumor about 30 years ago in Mexico.

Granulosa cell tumor may pose a diagnostic challenge in cytology preparations. First, there is some similarity between the granulosa tumor cells and reactive mesothelial cells. Indis‐ tinct cell borders, high nuclear cytoplasmic ratio and indentation of the nuclear membrane are helpful features in distinguishing granulosa tumor cells from mesothelial cells. Secondly, although nuclear features, especially nuclear grooves, are one of the classic features on gran‐ ulosa cell tumor, they can also be seen in other ovarian tumors such as Brenner tumor and other sex cord-stromal tumor. Other characteristic histological features for granulosa cell tu‐ mor, such as Call-Exner bodies, a second population of elongated theca cells, are rarely evi‐ dent on cytology specimens. Lastly, as occurred in our case, cells of carcinoid, especially pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors in this anatomic site, share many features of granulosa cells. Judicious use of a panel of immunocytochemistry (with the availability of sufficient sampling material) can be of great help in this scenario. Granulosa cell tumor is positive for inhibin, CD99, calretinin, vimentin, CD56, is generally negative for cytokeratin, EMA, Ber-Ep4, and is negative for neuroendocrine markers synaptophysin and chromogranin. Brenner tumor and other sex cord-stromal tumor usually are positive for cytokeratin and EMA.

As illustrated in this case, clinical-pathologic correlation is essential with octreotide scan preventing a diagnostic pitfall of neuroendocrine neoplasia. The on-site cytology interpreta‐ tion performed for each of 9 EUS-FNA passes played a pivotal role in obtaining adequate viable diagnostic material, considering the sampling difficulty due to extensive tumor ne‐ crosis despite the apparent large size of the tumor by imaging study. A more complete ICC panel was thus able to be performed. The ICC results together with cytomorphology led to a diagnosis consistent with the subsequently retrieved clinical history.

Thus, our final note: the full value of FNA is only achieved with the integrated approach: the integration of clinical information, light microscopic analysis, results of ancillary studies, and even the gross appearance of the aspiration material will inform and lead us to a more accurate pathology diagnosis that can help tremendously in directing patient care.

### **Acknowledgements**

The authors want to express their sincere gratitude to Drs. Nancy B. Kiviat (University of Washington, Seattle, WA), Melissa P. Upton (University of Washington, Seattle, WA) and Stephen J. Rulyak (Evergreen Medical Center, Gastroenterology, Seattle, WA), for their pro‐ fessional guidance, insightful discussions and tremendous technical support.

### **Author details**

**Comment:** The cytologic appearance of this tumor, along with the overall immuno-pheno‐ type demonstrated by calretinin and inhibin positivity, supports the diagnosis of granulo‐ sa cell tumor. Additional studies performed at PhenoPath Laboratory using the more sensitive anti-ER antibody SP1 document expression of estrogen receptor (in contrast to the negative anti-ER studies using the 1D5 clone), further supporting the diagnosis of

After the diagnosis, patient recalls that she had a procedure for granulosa cell tumor about

Granulosa cell tumor may pose a diagnostic challenge in cytology preparations. First, there is some similarity between the granulosa tumor cells and reactive mesothelial cells. Indis‐ tinct cell borders, high nuclear cytoplasmic ratio and indentation of the nuclear membrane are helpful features in distinguishing granulosa tumor cells from mesothelial cells. Secondly, although nuclear features, especially nuclear grooves, are one of the classic features on gran‐ ulosa cell tumor, they can also be seen in other ovarian tumors such as Brenner tumor and other sex cord-stromal tumor. Other characteristic histological features for granulosa cell tu‐ mor, such as Call-Exner bodies, a second population of elongated theca cells, are rarely evi‐ dent on cytology specimens. Lastly, as occurred in our case, cells of carcinoid, especially pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors in this anatomic site, share many features of granulosa cells. Judicious use of a panel of immunocytochemistry (with the availability of sufficient sampling material) can be of great help in this scenario. Granulosa cell tumor is positive for inhibin, CD99, calretinin, vimentin, CD56, is generally negative for cytokeratin, EMA, Ber-Ep4, and is negative for neuroendocrine markers synaptophysin and chromogranin. Brenner tumor and other sex cord-stromal tumor usually are positive for cytokeratin and EMA.

As illustrated in this case, clinical-pathologic correlation is essential with octreotide scan preventing a diagnostic pitfall of neuroendocrine neoplasia. The on-site cytology interpreta‐ tion performed for each of 9 EUS-FNA passes played a pivotal role in obtaining adequate viable diagnostic material, considering the sampling difficulty due to extensive tumor ne‐ crosis despite the apparent large size of the tumor by imaging study. A more complete ICC panel was thus able to be performed. The ICC results together with cytomorphology led to a

Thus, our final note: the full value of FNA is only achieved with the integrated approach: the integration of clinical information, light microscopic analysis, results of ancillary studies, and even the gross appearance of the aspiration material will inform and lead us to a more

The authors want to express their sincere gratitude to Drs. Nancy B. Kiviat (University of Washington, Seattle, WA), Melissa P. Upton (University of Washington, Seattle, WA) and Stephen J. Rulyak (Evergreen Medical Center, Gastroenterology, Seattle, WA), for their pro‐

accurate pathology diagnosis that can help tremendously in directing patient care.

fessional guidance, insightful discussions and tremendous technical support.

diagnosis consistent with the subsequently retrieved clinical history.

granulosa cell tumor.

310 Endoscopy

30 years ago in Mexico.

**Acknowledgements**

Lee-Ching Zhu1\*, Qinghua Feng2 and Verena S. Grieco3

\*Address all correspondence to: zhu.c@ghc.org

1 Anatomic Pathology, Group Health Permanente, Seattle, WA, USA

2 Department of Pathology, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA

3 Harborview Medical Center, Anatomic Pathology, Seattle, WA, USA

### **References**


aspiration (EUS-FNA) for undiagnosed intra-abdominal lymphadenopathy.J Gastro‐ enterol; 2009;44(6):562-7.

[24] Dumonceau JM, Polkowski M, Larghi A, Vilmann P, Giovannini M, Frossard JL, Heresbach D, Pujol B, Fernández-EsparrachG, Vazquez-Sequeiros E, Ginès A:Euro‐ pean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.Indications, results, and clinical impact of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling in gastroenterology: European So‐ ciety of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline.Endoscopy; 2011 Oct;

The Use of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Cytopathology Diagnosis

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52549

313

[25] Exocrine pancreas.In: Greene FL, Page DL, Fleming ID, et al. editors. AJCC cancer

[26] Klapman JB, Chang KJ:Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle injection. Gastro‐

[27] Tarantino I, Barresi, L:Interventional endoscopic ultrasound: Therapeutic capability

[28] Cho CM, Dewitt J, Ai-Haddad M:Echo-endoscopy: new therapeutic frontiers. Miner‐

[29] Savides TJ, Donohue M, Hunt G, et al:EUS-guided FNA diagnostic yield of malig‐ nancy in solid pancreatic masses:a benchmark for quality performance measure‐

[30] Layfield LJ, Bentz JS, and Gopez EV:Immediate on-site interpretation of fine-needle aspiration smears: a cost and compensation analysis.Cancer 2001;93319-322.

[31] Schwartz MR: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needel aspiration-time, diagnostic challenges and clnical impact. Cancer Cytopathology 2004;102(4):203-205.

[32] Klapman JB, Logrono R, Dye CE, et al:Clinical impact of on-site cytopathology inter‐ pretation on endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration.Am J Gastroenter‐

[33] Alsohaibani F, Girgis S, SandhaGS:Does onsite cytotechnology evaluation improve the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy?Can J

[34] Jhala N, Jhala D,Etoum I, Vickers SM, et a:Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy: a powerful tool to obtain samples from small lesions.Cancer

[35] Erickson RA, Sayage-Rable L, Beissner S:Factors predicting the number of EUS-guid‐ ed fine-needle passes for diagnosis of pancreatic malignancies. Gastrointestinal En‐

[36] Jhala NC, Jhala DN, Chhieng DC, et a:Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle as‐

piration-a cytopathologist's perspective.AJCP 2003; 120(3):351-367.

staging handbook. 6thed. New York: Springer-Verlag;2002. p.182.

and potential.World GastrointestEndosc 2009 Oct 15;1(1):39-44.

intestEndoscClin N Am. 2005 Jan;15(1):169-77.

va GastroenterolDietol. 2011 Jun;57(2):139-58.

ment.GastrointestEndosc 2007;66:277-82.

Gastroenterol. 2009 Jan;23(1):26-30.

43(10):897-912.

ol 2003;98:1289-94.

2004;102(4):239-246.

doscopy 2000;51(2):184-190.


[24] Dumonceau JM, Polkowski M, Larghi A, Vilmann P, Giovannini M, Frossard JL, Heresbach D, Pujol B, Fernández-EsparrachG, Vazquez-Sequeiros E, Ginès A:Euro‐ pean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.Indications, results, and clinical impact of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling in gastroenterology: European So‐ ciety of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline.Endoscopy; 2011 Oct; 43(10):897-912.

aspiration (EUS-FNA) for undiagnosed intra-abdominal lymphadenopathy.J Gastro‐

[9] Moehler M, Voigt J, Kastor M, Heil M, Sengespeick C, Biesterfeld S, Dippold W, Kan‐ zler S, Galle PR:Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) as primary diagnostic tool for unclear lesions in the upper gastrointestinal

[10] Fritscher-Ravens A, Izbicki JR, Sriram PV, et al:Endosonography-guided, fine-needle aspiration cytology extending the indication for organ-preserving pancreatic sur‐

[12] De Bellis M, Sherman S, et al:Tissue sampling at ERCP in suspected malignant biliary

[13] De Bellis M, Sherman S, et al:Tissue sampling at ERCP in suspected malignant biliary

[14] Vandervoort J, Soetikno RM, et al:Accuracy and complication rate of brush cytology

[15] Rösch T, Lorenz R, Braig C et al: Endoscopic ultrasound in small pancreatic tumors.

[16] Vilmann P, Saftoiu A:Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biop‐ sy:equipment and technique.J GastroenterolHepatol.Nov2006;21(11):1646-1655. [17] AabakkenL, Silvestri GA, Hawes R, et al:Cost-efficacy of endoscopic ultrasonogra‐ phy with fine-needle aspiration vs. mediastinotomy in patients with lung cancer and

[18] Harewood GC, Wiersema MJ, Edell ES, et al: Cost-minimization analysis of alterna‐ tive diagnostic approaches in a modeled patient with non-small cell lung cancer and

[19] Harewood GC, Wiersema MJ:A cost analysis of endoscopic ultrasound in the evalua‐

[20] Harewood GC, Wiersema MJ:A cost analysis of endoscopic ultrasound in the evalua‐ tion of pancreatic head adenocarcinoma.Am J Gastroeneerol 2001;96:2651-6.

[21] Chen VK, Arguedas MR, Kilgore ML, et al:A cost-minimization of analysis of alterna‐ tive strategies in diagnosing pancreatic cancer.Am J Gastroenterol 2004;99:2223-34.

[22] O'Toole D, Palazzo L, Arotcarena R et al:Assessment of complications of EUS-guided

[23] Chieng DC, JhalaD, Jhala N et al:Endoscopic ultrasound –guided fine-needle aspira‐

from bile duct versus pancreatic duct.GastrointestEndosc 1999;49:322-7.

suspected mediastinaladenopathy.Endoscopy 1999;31:707-11.

subcarinal lymphadenopathy.Mayo ClinProc 2002;77:155-64.

tion of esophageal cancer.Am J Gastroenterol 2002;97:452-8.

fine-needle aspiration.GastrointestEndosc 2001;53:470-4.

tion biopsy: a study of 103 cases. Cancer 2002;96:232-9.

[11] Erickson, RA: EUS-guided FNA.GastrointestEndosc. 2004 Aug;60(2):267-79.

enterol; 2009;44(6):562-7.

312 Endoscopy

tract.Dtsch Med Wochenschr; 2011 Feb;136(7):303-8.

gery.Am J Gastroenterol. Sep 2000;95(9):2255-2260.

strictures, part 1, GastrointestEndosc2002;56:552-61.

strictures, part 2, GastrointestEndosc2002;56:720-30.

Z Gastroenterol 1991;29:110-5.


[37] JhalaNC,Eltoum IA, Eloubeidi MA, et al:Providing on-site diagnosis of malignancy on endoscopic-ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration: should it be done?Annals DiagPathol 2007;11:176-181.

[49] Karim Z, Walker B, Lam E:Lymphoepithelial cysts of the pancreas: the use of endo‐ scopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in diagnosis.Can J Gastroenterol;

The Use of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Cytopathology Diagnosis

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52549

315

[50] Barresi L, Tarantino I, Granata A, Curcio G, Traina M:Pancreatic cystic lesions: How endoscopic ultrasound morphology and endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspira‐ tion help unlock the diagnostic puzzle. World J GastrointestEndosc; 2012 Jun 16;4(6):

[51] Bhatia V, Rastogi A, Saluja SS, Kumar M, Bihari C, Kalayarasan R, Gupta NL:Cystic pancreatic lymphangioma. The first report of a preoperative pathological diagnosis

[52] Coe AW, Evans J, Conway J:Pancreas cystic lymphangioma diagnosed with EUS-

[53] ZhuLC and Grieco V:Diagnostic value of unusual gross appearance of aspirated ma‐ terial from endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic and

[54] Dev V, Shah D, Gaw F, Lefor AT:Gastric outlet obstruction secondary to post chole‐ cystectomy biloma:case report and review of the literature. JSLS. 1998;2(2):185-8.

[55] Chang ML, Lin DY:Symptomless cyst formation at the location of a biloma resolved with a single aspiration:case report. Chang Gung Med J. 2000;23(12):794-8.

[56] Ponnudurai, R:Endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainage of a biloma: A novel ap‐

[57] Policarpio-Nicolas,ML, Shami VM, Kahaleh M, Adams RB, Mallery S, Stanley MW, Bardales RH, Stelow EB:Fine-needle aspiration cytology of pancreatic lymphoepithe‐

[58] Fujiwara H, Kohno N, Nakaya S, Ishikawa Y:Lymphoepithelial cyst of the pancreas

[60] Solcia EN, Capella C, Kloppel G:Tumors of the pancreas. Fascicle 20 in Atlas of Tu‐ mor Pathology, 3rd series. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Washington DC:1997,

[61] Weinstein LJ: Pancreas, in Cytology, Diagnostic principles and clinical correlates. Ci‐

[62] Zhu L and GriecoV:Identifying mucin on cytology specimens from EUS-FNA proce‐

[63] Ringel J, Löhr M:The MUC gene family: their role in diagnosis and early detection of

peripancreatic cystic lesions.ActaCytol. 2008 Sep-Oct;52(5):535-40.

by endoscopic ultrasound-guided cyst aspiration. JOP; 2011 Sep;12(5):473-6.

2010 Jun;24(6):348-50.

FNA. JOP; 2012 May;13(3):282-4.

proach. Endoscopy 2006;38:199.

lial cysts. Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2006;108:501-6.

with sebaceous differentiation. J Gastroenterol 2000;35:396-401.

bas ES and Ducatman BS, Saunders, Philadelphia 2003, 367-382.

dures.Digestive Disease Week, Washington, DC, 2007.

pancreatic cancer.Mol Cancer. 2003 Jan 7;2:9

[59] Adsay NV:Cystic lesions of the pancreas.Modern Pathology, 2007;20:S71-S93.

247-59.

215-223.


[49] Karim Z, Walker B, Lam E:Lymphoepithelial cysts of the pancreas: the use of endo‐ scopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in diagnosis.Can J Gastroenterol; 2010 Jun;24(6):348-50.

[37] JhalaNC,Eltoum IA, Eloubeidi MA, et al:Providing on-site diagnosis of malignancy on endoscopic-ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration: should it be done?Annals

[38] Dumonceau JM, Koessler T, vanHooft JE, Fockens P:Endoscopic ultrasonographyguided fine needle aspiration: Relatively low sensitivity in the endosonographer

[39] Iqbal S, Friedel D, Gupta M, Ogden L, Stavropoulos SN:Endoscopic-ultrasoundguided fine-needle aspiration and the role of the cytopathologist in solid pancreatic

[40] Cherian PT, Mohan P, Douiri A, Taniere P, Hejmadi RK, Mahon BS:Role of endo‐ scopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic and peripancreatic lesions: is onsite cytopathology necessary?HPB (Oxford); 2010

[41] HikichiT, Irisawa A, Bhutani MS, et al:Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle as‐ piration of solid pancreatic masses with rapid on-site cytological evaluation by endo‐ sonographers without attendance of cytopathologists.J Gastroenterol2009;44(4):322-8.

[42] Nguyen YP, Maple, JT, Zhang, Q, et al:Reliability of gross visual assessment of speci‐ men adequacy during EUS-guided FNA of pancreatic masses.GastrointestEndosc

[43] Boujaoude J:Role of endoscopic ultrasound in diagnosis and therapy of pancreatic

[44] Eltoum IA, Jhala CD, Crowe DR, et al:Cumulative sum procedure in evaluation of EUS-guided FNA cytology: the learning curve and diagnostic performance beyond

[45] Nasuti JF, Gupta PK and Baloch ZW:Diagnostic value and cost-effectiveness of onsite evaluation of fine-needle aspiration specimens: review of 5,688 cases.Diagn. Cy‐

[46] Shin HJC, Lahoti S, and Sneige N:Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspira‐

[47] Savoy AD, Raimondo M, Woodward TA, et al:Can endosonographers evaluate onsite cytologic adequacy?A comparison with cytotechnologists.GastrointestEndosc

[48] de Jong K, Poley JW, van Hooft JE, Visser M, Bruno MJ, Fockens P:Endoscopic ultra‐ sound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic cystic lesions provides inadequate material for cytology and laboratory analysis: initial results from a prospective

population.World J Gastroenterol; 2012 May 21;18(19):2357-63.

lesion diagnosis.Patholog Res Int; 2012;2012:317167.

adenocarcinomas. World J Gastro 2007;13(27):3662-3666.

sensitivity and specificity.Cytopathology 2007;18:143-50.

tion in 179 cases.Cancer (Cancer Cytopathol) 2002;96:174-80.

DiagPathol 2007;11:176-181.

314 Endoscopy

Aug;12(6):389-95.

2009;69(7):1264-70.

topathol. 2002;27:1-4.

2007;65(7):953-7.

study.Endoscopy; 2011 Jul;43(7):585-90.


[64] Hruban RH, Maitra A, Kern SE, Goggins M:Precursors to pancreatic cancer.Gastro‐ enterolClin North Am. 2007 Dec;36(4):831-49.

[77] Cervera P, Fléjou JF:Changing pathology with changing drugs: tumors of the gastro‐ intestinal tract.Pathobiology.2011;78(2):76-89. doi: 10.1159/000315535. Epub 2011 Jun

The Use of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Cytopathology Diagnosis

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52549

317

[78] Saijo N:Critical comments for roles of biomarkers in the diagnosis and treatment of

[79] William WN Jr:Oral premalignant lesions: any progress with systemic therapies?Cur‐

[80] Smith RA, Tang J, Tudur-Smith C, Neoptolemos JP, Ghaneh P:Meta-analysis of im‐ munohistochemical prognostic markers in resected pancreatic cancer.Br J Cancer.

[81] Larsen AK, Ouaret D, El Ouadrani K, Petitprez A:Targeting EGFR and VEGF(R) pathway cross-talk in tumor survival and angiogenesis.PharmacolTher. 2011 Jul;

[82] Murphy M, Stordal B:Erlotinib or gefitinib for the treatment of relapsed platinum pretreated non-small cell lung cancer and ovarian cancer: a systematic review.Drug

[83] Iacopetta B, Grieu F, Amanuel B:Microsatellite instability in colorectalcancer.Asia Pac J ClinOncol. 2010 Dec;6(4):260-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1743-7563.2010.01335.x. Epub 2010 Oct

[84] Imai K, Yamamoto H:Carcinogenesis and microsatellite instability: the interrelation‐ ship between genetics and epigenetics.Carcinogenesis. 2008 Apr;29(4):673-80. Epub

[85] Lawes DA, SenGupta S, BoulosPB:The clinical importance and prognostic implica‐ tions of microsatellite instability in sporadic cancer.Eur J SurgOncol. 2003 Apr;29(3):

[86] Chapusot C, Martin L, Puig PL, Ponnelle T, Cheynel N, Bouvier AM, Rageot D, Roignot P, Rat P, Faivre J, Piard F:What is the best way to assess microsatellite insta‐ bility status in colorectal cancer? Study on a population base of 462 colorectalcanc‐

[87] Shia J, Ellis NA, Paty PB, Nash GM, Qin J, Offit K, Zhang XM, Markowitz AJ, Nafa K, Guillem JG, Wong WD, Gerald WL, KlimstraDS:Value of histopathology in predict‐ ing microsatellite instability in hereditarynonpolyposiscolorectal cancer and sporadic

[88] Edmonston TB, Cuesta KH, Burkholder S, Barusevicius A, Rose D, Kovatich AJ, Bo‐ man B, Fry R, Fishel R, Palazzo JP:Colorectal carcinomas with high microsatellite in‐ stability: defining a distinct immunologic and molecular entity with respect to

cancer.Cancer Treat Rev. 2012 Feb;38(1):63-7. Epub 2011 Jun 8.

2011 Apr 26;104(9):1440-51. Epub 2011 Mar 29. Review.

Resist Updat. 2011 Jun;14(3):177-90. Epub 2011 Mar 24.

ers.Am J SurgPathol. 2004 Dec;28(12):1553-9.

colorectalcancer.Am J SurgPathol. 2003 Nov;27(11):1407-17.

prognosticmarkers.Hum Pathol. 2000 Dec;31(12):1506-14.

rOpinOncol. 2012 May;24(3):205-10.

131(1):80-90. Epub 2011 Mar 23.

15.

26.

2007 Oct 17.

201-12.


[77] Cervera P, Fléjou JF:Changing pathology with changing drugs: tumors of the gastro‐ intestinal tract.Pathobiology.2011;78(2):76-89. doi: 10.1159/000315535. Epub 2011 Jun 15.

[64] Hruban RH, Maitra A, Kern SE, Goggins M:Precursors to pancreatic cancer.Gastro‐

[65] Albores-Saavedra J, Simpson K, Dancer YJ, Hruban :.Intestinal type adenocarcinoma: a previously unrecognized histologic variant of ductal carcinoma of the pan‐

[66] Furukawa T, Klöppel G, VolkanAdsay N, et al:Classification of types of intraductal papillary-mucinous neoplasm of the pancreas: a consensus study.Virchows Arch.

[67] Giorgadze TA, Peterman H, Baloch ZW, Furth EE, Pasha T, Shiina N, Zhang PJ, Gup‐ ta PK:Diagnostic utility of mucin profile in fine-needle aspiration specimens of the pancreas: an immunohistochemical study with surgical pathology correlation.2006

[68] Zhu L and Peck A: Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration of pancreat‐ ic endocrine neoplasms:Diagnostic challenges and the role of immunocytochemis‐

[69] Eloubeidi MA, Tamhane AR, Buxbaum J:Unusual, metastatic, or neuroendocrine tu‐ mor of the pancreas:a diagnosis with endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspi‐ ration and immunohistochemistry.Saudi J Gastroenterol;2012 Mar-Apr;18(2):99-105.

[70] Chang F, Vu C, Chandra A, Meenan J, Herbert A:Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration cytology of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours: cytomorphologi‐ cal and immunocytochemical evaluation. Cytopathology. Feb 2006;17(1):10-17.

[71] NotoharaK,Hamazaki S, Tsukayama C, et al:Solid-pseudopapillary tumor of the pan‐ creas: immunohistochemical localization of neuroendocrine markers and CD10. Am J

[72] Portela-Gomes GM, Hacker GW, Weitgasser R:Neuroendocrine cell markers for pan‐ creatic islets and tumors.ApplImmunohistochemMolMorphol. 2004 Sep;12(3):183-92.

[73] Carlsson J:Potential for clinical radionuclide-based imaging and therapy of common cancers expressing EGFR-family receptors.Tumour Biol. 2012 Jun;33(3):653-9. Epub

[74] Matthaios D, Zarogoulidis P, Balgouranidou I, Chatzaki E, Kakolyris S:Molecular pathogenesis of pancreatic cancer and clinical perspectives.Oncology. 2011;81(3-4):

[75] Stella GM, Luisetti M, Inghilleri S, CemmiF,Scabini R, Zorzetto M, Pozzi E:Targeting EGFR in non-small-cell lung cancer: lessons, experiences, strategies.Respir Med. 2012

[76] Bohanes P, LaBonte MJ, Winder T, Lenz HJ:Predictive molecular classifiers in color‐

enterolClin North Am. 2007 Dec;36(4):831-49.

creas.Ann DiagnPathol. 2007 Feb;11(1):3-9.

2005 Nov;447(5):794-9. Epub2005 Aug 9.

Jun 25;108(3):186-97.

316 Endoscopy

2012 Jan 7.

259-72. Epub 2011 Nov 23.

Feb;106(2):173-83. Epub 2011 Nov 21

ectal cancer.SeminOncol. 2011 Aug;38(4):576-87.

try.Check Sample, ASCP, 2008.

SurgPathol. Oct 2000;24(10):1361-1371.


[89] Kouniavsky G, Zeiger MA:The quest for diagnostic molecular markers for thyroid nodules with indeterminate or suspicious cytology.J SurgOncol. 2012 Apr 1;105(5): 438-43.

[103] Ross JS:Breast cancer biomarkers and HER2 testing after 10 years of anti-HER2thera‐

The Use of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) in Cytopathology Diagnosis

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52549

319

[104] Sauter G, Lee J, Bartlett JM, Slamon DJ, Press MF:Guidelines for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing: biologic and methodologicconsiderations.JClinOn‐

[105] Cuadros M, Villegas R:Systematicreview of HER2breast cancer testing.ApplImmuno‐

[106] Bayani J, Squire JA:Fluorescence in situ Hybridization (FISH).CurrProtocCell Biol.

[107] Shabaik A, Lin G, Peterson M, HastehF, Tipps A, Datnow B, Weidner N:Reliability of Her2/neu, estrogen receptor, and progesterone receptor testing by immunohisto‐ chemistry on cell block of FNA and serous effusions from patients with primary and

[108] Hanley KZ, Birdsong GG, Cohen C, SiddiquiMT:Immunohistochemical detection of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor recep‐ tor 2 expression in breast carcinomas: comparison on cell block, needle-core, and tis‐

[109] Barroca H, Carvalho JL, da Costa MJ,Cirnes L, Seruca R, Schmitt FC:Detection of Nmyc amplification in neuroblastomas using Southern blotting on fine needle aspi‐

[110] Fröstad B, Martinsson T, Tani E, Falkmer U, Darnfors C, Skoog L, Kogner P:The use of fine-needle aspiration cytology in the molecular characterization of neuroblastoma

[111] Constantinou M, Binka-Kowalska A, Borkowska E, Zajac E, Jałmuzna P, Matych J, Nawrocka A, Kałuzewski B:Application of multiplexFISH, CGH and MSSCP techni‐ ques for cytogenetic and molecular analysis of transitional cell carcinoma (TCC) cells

[112] Halling KC, KippBR:Bladder cancer detection using FISH (UroVysion assay).Ad‐

[113] vanRhijn BW, van der Poel HG, van der KwastTH:Urine markers for bladder cancer surveillance: a systematic review.Eur Urol. 2005 Jun;47(6):736-48. Epub 2005 Mar 23.

[114] Dey P:Urinary markers of bladder carcinoma.ClinChimActa. 2004 Feb;340(1-2):57-65.

[115] Feng Q, Balasubramanian, A, Hawes SE et al:Detection of hypermethylated genes in women with and without cervical neoplasia.J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:273-82.

[116] Hawes SE, Stern JE, Feng Q, Wiens LW, Rasey JS, Lu H, Kiviat NB, Vesselle H:DNA‐ hypermethylation of tumors from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients is as‐

metastatic breast carcinoma.DiagnCytopathol. 2011 May;39(5):328-32.

sue block preparations.Cancer. 2009 Aug 25;117(4):279-88.

in voided urine specimens.J Appl Genet. 2006;47(3):273-5.

rates.ActaCytol. 2001 Mar-Apr;45(2):169-72.

in children.Cancer. 1999 Apr 25;87(2):60-8.

vAnatPathol. 2008 Sep;15(5):279-86.

py.Drug News Perspect. 2009 Mar;22(2):93-106.

col. 2009 Mar 10;27(8):1323-33. Epub 2009 Feb 9.

histochemMolMorphol. 2009 Jan;17(1):1-7.

2004 Sep;Chapter 22:Unit 22.4.


[103] Ross JS:Breast cancer biomarkers and HER2 testing after 10 years of anti-HER2thera‐ py.Drug News Perspect. 2009 Mar;22(2):93-106.

[89] Kouniavsky G, Zeiger MA:The quest for diagnostic molecular markers for thyroid nodules with indeterminate or suspicious cytology.J SurgOncol. 2012 Apr 1;105(5):

[90] Bartolazzi A, Bellotti C, Sciacchitano S:Methodology and technical requirements of the galectin-3 test for the preoperative characterization of thyroidnodules.ApplIm‐

[91] Freitas BC, Cerutti J:.Genetic markers differentiating follicular thyroid carcinoma from benign lesions.Mol Cell Endocrinol. 2010 May 28;321(1):77-85. Epub 2009 Nov

[92] Nikiforova MN, NikiforovYE:Molecular diagnostics and predictors in thyroid can‐

[93] Arora N, Scognamiglio T, Zhu B, Fahey TJ 3rd:Do benign thyroid nodules have malig‐ nant potential? An evidence-based review.World J Surg. 2008 Jul;32(7):1237-46.

[94] Carpi A, Nicolini A, Marchetti C, Iervasi G, Antonelli A, Carpi F:Percutaneous largeneedle aspiration biopsy histology of palpable thyroid nodules: technical and diag‐

[95] Kapur U, WojcikEM:Follicular neoplasm of the thyroid--vanishing cytologicdiagno‐

[96] Ogilvie JB, Piatigorsky EJ, Clark OH:Current status of fine needle aspiration for thy‐

[97] Carpi A, Mechanick JI, Nicolini A, Rubello D, Iervasi G, Bonazzi V, Giardino :Thy‐ roid nodule evaluation: what have we really learned from recent clinical guidelines?

[98] Mechanick JI, Carpi A:Progress in the preoperative diagnosis of thyroid nodules: managing uncertainties and the ultimate role for molecularinvestigation.Biomed‐

[99] Lambros MB, Natrajan R, Reis-FilhoJS:Chromogenic and fluorescent in situ hybridi‐

[100] Lee JA, Shaheen M, Walke T, Daly M:Clinical and health economic outcomes of alter‐ native HER2 test strategies for guiding adjuvant trastuzumabtherapy.Expert Rev

[101] Ross JS:Update on HER2 testing for breast and upper gastrointestinal tract can‐

[102] Penault-Llorca F, Bilous M, Dowsett M, Hanna W, OsamuraRY, Rüschoff J, van de Vijver M:Emerging technologies for assessing HER2amplification.Am J ClinPathol.

munohistochemMolMorphol. 2012 Jan;20(1):2-7. Review.

nostic performance.Histopathology. 2007 Aug;51(2):249-57.

BiomedPharmacother. 2006 Sep;60(8):393-5. Epub 2006 Aug 4.

Pharmacother. 2006 Sep;60(8):396-404. Epub 2006 Aug 1

Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2011 Jun;11(3):325-41.

cers.Biomark Med. 2011 Jun;5(3):307-18.

2009 Oct;132(4):539-48.

zation in breast cancer.HumPathol. 2007 Aug;38(8):1105-22.

cer.Thyroid. 2009 Dec;19(12):1351-61.

sis?DiagnCytopathol. 2007 Aug;35(8):525-8.

roidnodules.Adv Surg. 2006;40:223-38.

438-43.

318 Endoscopy

20.


sociated with gender and histologic type.Lung Cancer. 2010 Aug;69(2):172-9. Epub 2009 Nov 28.

**Chapter 14**

**Endoscopy in Pregnant Patients**

Additional information is available at the end of the chapter

Although gastrointestinal endoscopy is generally safe, its safety must be separately analyzed during pregnancy. Though it is prudent to postpone the investigation to the third trimester or rather to the postpartum period; in certain clinical situations where therapeutic intervention is necessary, it offers a relatively safe alternative to radiologic or surgical intervention. There are

**1.** Oversedation may cause maternal hypotension and hypoxia, which in turn may lead to

**3.** Care must be taken with maternal positioning to avoid inferior vena caval compression by the pregnant uterus, which can lead to decreased uterine blood flow and fetal hypoxia. The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines [2] list the follow‐

Fetal risks from endoscopic medications are minimized by avoiding FDA category D drugs, minimizing endoscopic medications, and anesthesiologist attendance at endoscopy. Esopha‐ gogastroduedenoscopy (EGD) seems to be relatively safe for the fetus and may be per‐ formed when strongly indicated during pregnancy. Flexible sigmoidoscopy during pregnancy also appears to be relatively safe for the fetus and may be performed when strongly indicated. Colonoscopy may be considered in pregnant patients during the second trimester if there is a strong indication. Data on colonoscopy during the other trimesters are limited. Therapeutic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) seems to be relatively safe during pregnancy and should be performed for strong indications (for exam‐ ple, complicated choledocholithiasis). Endoscopic safety precautions during pregnancy in‐ clude the performance of endoscopy in hospital by an expert endoscopist and only when

> © 2013 Savas; licensee InTech. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use,

© 2013 The Author(s). Licensee InTech. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution,

distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

a number of potential risks associated with endoscopy during pregnancy [1]:

**2.** The fetus may be exposed to potentially teratogenic drugs and radiaton.

fetal hypoxia, with potentially fatal consequences.

ing general principles guiding endoscopy in pregnancy (Table1).

Nurten Akyurek Savas

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/53242

**1. Introduction**


### **Chapter 14**
