Objectives: The objective of this pilot study was to compare the performance of contrast-enhanced EUS (CE-EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) with EUS-FNA for lymph node (LN) staging in esophageal cancer.
Methods: Thirty-seven subjects with esophageal cancer undergoing EUS staging were enrolled, and 30 completed this institutional review board-approved study. A Prosound F75 US system (Hitachi Medical Systems, Tokyo, Japan) with harmonic contrast imaging software and GF-UCT180 curvilinear endoscope (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) was utilized. All LNs identified by standard EUS were first noted. Sonazoid (dose: 1 mL; GE Healthcare, Oslo, Norway) was administered peritumorally, and all enhanced LNs were recorded. Fine-needle aspiration was performed on LNs considered suspicious by EUS alone, as well as LNs enhanced on CE-EUS. Performance of each modality was compared using FNA cytology as reference standard.
Results: A total of 132 LNs were detected with EUS, of which 59 showed enhancement on CE-EUS. Fifty-three LNs underwent FNA, and 22 LNs were determined to be malignant. Among the latter, 10 were considered suspicious by EUS, whereas the other 12 LNs underwent FNA only because of CE-EUS enhancement. Contrast-enhanced EUS showed enhancement in 19 of the 22 malignant LNs. The rate of metastatic node identification from EUS was 45% (10/22), and it was 86% (19/22; P = 0.008) for CE-EUS. Eight subjects (8/30 [27% of study total]) had nodal status upgraded by the addition of CE-EUS, which influenced LN staging and clinical management.
Conclusions: Fine-needle aspiration of LNs identified by CE-EUS may increase metastasis positive rate by ruling out LNs not associated with the tumor drainage pattern. In addition, CE-EUS seems to identify more metastatic LNs that would not be biopsied under the standard EUS criteria.
Keywords: Contrast-EUS; EUS; Esophageal cancer; Fine needle biopsy; Sentinel lymph node.
Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwers Health, Inc on behalf of Scholar Media Publishing.