Impact of rapid on-site evaluation in endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition for resectable pancreatic body and tail cancer

Table 1 Patient characteristics (n = 94), n (%)

Characteristic	Value
Age, mean ± SD (years)	72.2 ± 9.4
Sex, male/female	52/42
Tumor location
Body	47 (50)
Tail	47 (50)
Lesion size, mean ± SD (mm)	19.7 ± 7.6
Final diagnosis
Adenocarcinoma	92 (98)
Adenosquamous carcinoma	1 (1.1)
Anaplastic carcinoma	1 (1.1)
Surgical resection	84 (89)

Table 2 Characteristics and outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (n = 94), n (%)

Variable	Value
Endoscopist performing EUS-TA
Trainee	55 (59)
Expert	39 (41)
Needle used
Franseen, 22-gauge	18 (19)
Franseen, 25-gauge	13 (14)
Menghini, 22-gauge	20 (21)
Menghini, 25-gauge	11 (12)
Trident, 22-gauge	11 (12)
Trident, 25-gauge	13 (14)
Fork-tip, 22-gauge	5 (5.3)
Fork-tip, 25-gauge	3 (3.2)
Suction technique
Suction with syringe	65 (71)
Slow-pull	18 (20)
No suction	9 (9.6)
Unknown	2 (2.1)
Number of punctures
1	56 (60)
2	28 (30)
3	6 (6.4)
4	4 (4.3)
Diagnostic accuracy of cytology (per patient)	91/94 (96.8)
Diagnostic accuracy of histology (per patient)	62/69 (89.9)
Adverse events	0

EUS-TA: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition.

Table 3 Factors associated with discrepancy between rapid on-site evaluation and final cytologic diagnosis

	Univariate analysis			Multivariate analysis
	OR	95%CI	P value	OR	95%CI	P value
Tumor location (body)	2.55	0.725-8.94	0.145	5.30	1.19-23.7	0.0291
Lesion size < 20 mm	1.46	0.450-4.72	0.529
Trainee operator	0.802	0.247-2.60	0.713
FNA needle	6.03	1.69-21.6	0.0058	7.85	1.94-31.8	0.0129
25-gauge needle	1.18	0.365-3.84	0.777
Suction with syringe	5.30	0.649-43.2	0.120

Multivariate analysis was performed using a stepwise selection method. OR: Odds ratio; CI: Confidence interval; FNA: Fine-needle aspiration.