Few studies have compared the diagnostic utility of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) tissue sampling for extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ECC). We evaluated the efficacy and safety of EUS-FNA for diagnosing ECC compared with ERCP tissue sampling. Patients who underwent EUS-FNA or ERCP tissue sampling to differentiate ECC from benign biliary disease were enrolled retrospectively between October 2011 and March 2017. We evaluated diagnostic performances of EUS-FNA and ERCP tissue sampling based on pathological evaluation. We compared adverse events in EUS-FNA and ERCP tissue sampling. We enrolled 73 patients with biliary disease and performed EUS-FNA and ERCP in 19 and 54 patients, respectively. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of ERCP tissue sampling were 76.0%, 100%, and 88.9%, respectively, and for EUS-FNA these were 81.8%, 87.5%, and 84.2%, respectively. Statistical values of ERCP tissue sampling and EUS-FNA were not significantly different. The adverse event frequency of EUS-FNA was significantly lower than that of ERCP tissue sampling (0% vs. 25.9%, p = 0.033). The diagnostic ability of EUS-FNA for ECC is similar to that of ERCP tissue sampling. EUS-FNA is a safer tissue sampling modality than ERCP for evaluating biliary disease.
Keywords: ERCP; EUS-FNA; accuracy; adverse event; cholangiocarcinoma.