Background: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is a main tool in gastroenterology for both diagnosis and exclusion of pancreatic pathology. It allows minimally invasive assessment of various diseases or anatomic variations affecting the pancreas also with the help of new Doppler technologies, elastography, contrast-enhanced imaging including post hoc image processing with quantification analyses, three-dimensional reconstruction, and artificial intelligence. EUS also allows interventional direct access to the pancreatic parenchyma and the retroperitoneal space, to the pancreatic duct, pancreatic masses, cysts, and vascular structures. Summary: This review aimed to summarize new developments of EUS in the field of pancreatology. We highlight the role of EUS in evaluating pancreatic pathology by describing normal anatomic variants like pancreas divisum, pancreatic lipomatosis, pancreatic fibrosis in the elderly and characterizing pancreatic masses, both in the context of chronic pancreatitis and within healthy pancreatic parenchyma. EUS is considered the optimal imaging modality for pancreatic masses of uncertain dignity and allows both cytological diagnosis and histology, which is essential not only for neoplastic conditions but also for tailoring therapy for benign inflammatory conditions. Key Messages: EUS plays an indispensable role in pancreatology and the development of new diagnostic and interventional approaches to the retroperitoneal space and the pancreas exponentially increased over the last years. The development of computer-aided diagnosis and artificial intelligence algorithms hold the potential to overcome the obstacles associated with interobserver variability and will most likely support decision-making in the management of pancreatic disease.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is a fundamental tool for the diagnosis as well as for therapeutic procedures in gastroenterology, hepatology, and pancreatology. It combines the advantage of endoscopy to gain the access to the gastrointestinal tract with the features of high-frequency ultrasound (US) probes to achieve superior visualization of adjacent anatomical regions like the pancreas.

The visualization of the pancreatic gland through imaging in the daily routine is challenging due to its retroperitoneal location. To maximize patients’ safety and avoid unnecessary costs, pancreas imaging is usually performed noninvasively adopting a step-up approach. Transabdominal US is a widespread first-line tool for the evaluation of the pancreas [1, 2]. However, this modality has some drawbacks due to operator and patients related factors [3]. Transabdominal US is useful as a screening method, but systematic visualization of pathologies or lesions is not always possible. As a second step, cross-sectional imaging techniques like computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are frequently used [1].

Sometimes, the results of the above-mentioned examinations are not conclusive, and EUS is performed to examine the pancreatic parenchyma. EUS is an endoscopic imaging modality which provides the highest spatial resolution of the pancreas compared with CT or MRI [4, 5]. This is possible due to the proximity to the pancreas to the US transducer, which is located on the tip of the flexible endoscope [6]. EUS examination can be performed either with a radial or linear transducer. Linear EUS performs imaging in the same plane as the shaft of the endoscope, whereas radial EUS offers a panoramic circumferential view perpendicular to the shaft of the endoscope. EUS miniprobes can be inserted in the working channel of several endoscopes and can be used to perform intraductal US within the bile duct or pancreatic duct. Miniature probes are available in a variety of frequencies, outer diameters, and tip designs [7]. They can be useful for the evaluation of subepithelial lesions, but their use is not widespread commonly used due to limited durability and high price. EUS is performed guiding the transducer next to the pancreas by positioning the scope in the stomach, bulb, and second portion of the duodenum and by eliminating the artifacts of intestinal gas with suction, instillation of water, or by filling the balloon on the echoendoscope with water.

Strength and Limitation of EUS in Pancreatology

EUS is currently considered the most advanced technique for the diagnosis of pancreaticobiliary diseases in terms of spatial resolution, especially for the evaluation of the parenchyma and the secondary pancreatic ducts [8]. The two major limitations of EUS preventing it being the “gold standard” technique for primary assessment of pancreatic diseases are the lack of standard criteria to be used and the operator-dependent acquisition of high-quality images. Visualization of the pancreatic gland can be heterogeneous, mainly due to anatomical issues and parenchymatous properties such as fibrosis, fat content, or calcifications that may induce some degrees of acoustic shadowing [9]. Moreover, accuracy seems to be lower in the tail of the pancreas [10, 11]. However, EUS is still considered the best diagnostic technique for the detection of small pancreatic processes [4, 12, 13].

EUS is difficult to learn; therefore, teaching has to be standardized [14]. Several guidelines for the assessment of competency in EUS have been published by several GI societies [15‒19]. Before independent practice, ESGE recommends a procedure volume of more than 250 cases per year with satisfactory visualization of key anatomical landmarks in more than 90% of the cases [20].

The other side of the medal in having high-resolution imaging of the pancreatic features available is the need for differentiation between normal variants and the early stages of disease. This has been demonstrated in the evaluation of the minimal-change chronic pancreatitis and in the follow-up of high-risk individuals for pancreatic cancer [21]. Here, it was not possible to differentiate between physiological age-related pancreatic morphological changes and early signs of pancreatic chronic inflammation [22]. In addition, structural alterations due to fibrotic changes after an acute pancreatitis cannot be differentiated between an early form of a chronic pancreatitis or age-related fibrotic changes.

It should be kept in mind that EUS is an invasive procedure that entails minimal lethality risk [23]. It requires conscious sedation or even tracheal intubation in high-risk patients, particularly in therapeutic procedures with aspiration risk [24]. Complications are associated with underlying disease, the general health condition of the patient, and the type of echoendoscope chosen. Among patients with gastric outlet obstruction, a complete EUS is not possible. General perforation risk is estimated to be 0.03–0.06% [25, 26]. Perforations are mostly localized in the mid and lower esophagus and in the duodenal bulb. After EUS fine-needle aspiration (FNA), perforation risk increases up to 6.3% [27]. Bleeding after diagnostic EUS is rare (0–1.4%); however, after therapeutic or diagnostic biopsy procedures, the incidence of bleeding increases, with the maximal risk having been described for intracystic microforceps biopsy [12, 28, 29] and in patients receiving antithrombotic agents [30, 31]. Acute pancreatitis is described after FNA/FNB and after advanced procedures like RFA [32]. EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic masses is infrequently associated with pancreatitis [33‒35]. For pancreatic cysts, FNA pancreatitis occurs in up to 2% of the cases [36, 37]. In one recent study, it was shown that the risk of pancreatitis after EUS-FNA in branch-duct IPMN is 6 times higher compared to those with other types of cysts [38]. Due to the risk of superinfection, antibiotics are mandatory during invasive procedures of pancreatic cysts [39]. No increased risk was shown if trainees were performing the FNA procedure [40]. A rare complication of EUS-guided sampling is tumor cell seeding [41, 42]. The majority of published cases report that tumor cell seeding occurs after multiple passes. However, considering the low number of studies on the topic, a clear correlation between tumor seeding and the needle type or the number of passes cannot be ascertained [43].

Role of EUS in Diagnosis of Anatomic Variants of the Pancreas

Pancreatic parenchyma normally appears homogenous with salt-and-pepper texture, and the contour of the pancreas is normally smooth without significant lobularity. Echogenicity tends to increase with age and with obesity (see chapter pancreatic lipomatosis).

The main pancreatic duct appears as a linear anechoic structure with hyperechoic walls. Its normal caliber ranges from 3 mm in the head to 1 mm in the pancreatic tail. Side branches can be visualized with EUS in healthy patients. In up to 17% of the patients undergoing EUS for a non-pancreatic indication, i.e., patients without clinical signs or suspicion of pancreatic disease, pancreatic abnormalities are detected by EUS [44]. These results suggest that cautious interpretation of EUS findings for early changes of pancreatic parenchyma is necessary. For a definitive diagnosis of a chronic pancreatic inflammatory disease, namely, chronic pancreatitis, a minimum of 2 criteria are needed [45] in order not to overinterpret subtle changes of unclear clinical significance, which may be age-related or induced by exogenic noxae [22, 46]. In the next chapters, we will discuss some anatomical variants that are usually visualized during EUS and should be distinguished from pathological findings.

The Visualization of the Ventral and Dorsal Split of the Pancreas

Pancreatic imaging with transabdominal US and EUS can detect differences in echogenicity in the pancreatic parenchyma that is derived from the ventral pancreatic split (ventral anlage, Fig. 1) [47]. This can be explained by the diminished fat content of the ventral bud [48, 49]. An endosonographic border between the hypoechoic ventral part and a brighter dorsal anlage can be seen in up to 75% of the patients [47]. It is important not to interpret the ventral anlage as a pancreatic mass [50]. On the other hand, as shown in the NEST case series, a prominent demarcation between the ventral and dorsal anlage may make the detection of pancreatic masses more difficult, with the risk of overseeing malignancy [51]. In such cases, close follow-up of the suspected lesion should be offered, since also experienced endosonographers have been shown to oversee cancer arising in this area [51].

Fig. 1.

Visualization of the different echogenicity between the hypoechoic ventral split (*) and the hyperechoic lipomatotic pancreatic head (X) with linear EUS.

Fig. 1.

Visualization of the different echogenicity between the hypoechoic ventral split (*) and the hyperechoic lipomatotic pancreatic head (X) with linear EUS.

Close modal

Pancreatic Lipomatosis and Pseudolipomatous Hypertrophy

Pancreatic lipomatosis (PL) is defined as the fatty infiltration (FI) of the pancreatic parenchyma [52]. The degree of FI on EUS is typically estimated by comparison of the echogenicity of the pancreas with the surrounding organs such as the spleen and kidneys [53] (Fig. 2). The fat itself does not determine the echogenicity, but the architectural modification due to alternation of glandular and fatty interfaces is responsible for the hyperechoic image [49]. EUS can detect subtle differences in fat in various tissues, such as the liver, where areas of circumscribed steatosis are better detected than with CT [54, 55]. PL represents the most frequent benign condition of the adult pancreas [56]. The reported prevalence varies from 16% in the healthy population up to 61% in patients with comorbidities like diabetes mellitus or metabolic syndrome [53, 57‒59]. It can be either diffuse or focal and can be a dynamic process with the possibility of progression or regression over time [60]. Some patients develop exocrine pancreatic insufficiency and some degree of pancreatic fibrosis or even chronic pancreatitis [61]. The extreme variant is pseudolipomatous hypertrophy. This condition is very uncommon. It is often associated with syndromes like Shwachman-Diamond or cystic fibrosis. It can also be clinically discovered as a mass or pseudotumor, particularly if it is associated with an enlargement of the pancreas [62, 63]. If EUS visualization depth is impaired due to the hyperechoic appearance of FI, cross-sectional imaging usually leads to a definitive diagnosis [50]. However, in rare cases, histological confirmation to rule out liposarcoma may be necessary [64].

Fig. 2.

Pancreas lipomatosis. EUS showing the pancreas body from gastric position with a regular not dilated pancreatic duct. Increased echogenicity of the pancreatic parenchyma compared to the kidney (*) defines pancreatic FI or lipomatosis.

Fig. 2.

Pancreas lipomatosis. EUS showing the pancreas body from gastric position with a regular not dilated pancreatic duct. Increased echogenicity of the pancreatic parenchyma compared to the kidney (*) defines pancreatic FI or lipomatosis.

Close modal

Pancreas Divisum

Pancreas divisum (PD) is the most common congenital anomaly of the pancreas. Among MRCP and autopsy studies, the prevalence in the general population is about 8% [65].

Due to the failure of the fusion of the ventral and dorsal pancreatic splits during embryological development, the dorsal duct becomes the main channel of drainage for pancreatic secretion from the body and tail regions of the pancreas. PD is common in the general population and asymptomatic [66]. However, it is a matter of debate if PD may play a role in the development of recurrent acute or chronic pancreatitis as a “two-hit” phenomenon in case of predisposing factors like gene mutations [67, 68]. There are three types of PD. Type 1 (classic PD) is the complete failure of fusion of the ducts of Santorini and Wirsung, type 2 is the absence of the duct of Wirsung, and type 3 (incomplete PD) is the presence of a tiny communication between the dominant dorsal duct (Santorini) and the main pancreatic duct [69].

The diagnosis of PD is usually made in the evaluation of patients with idiopathic or recurrent acute pancreatitis [66]. As a step-up approach, MRCP to evaluate ductal abnormalities is most commonly performed. EUS, differently to ERCP, allows detailed evaluation of the pancreaticobiliary ductal system without injecting contrast medium. Retrospective studies analyzed the efficacy of EUS for diagnosis of PD with overall accuracy of up to 97% and moderate positive predictive value of 80% [12, 70, 71]. PD can be accurately excluded if the main pancreatic duct can be visualized backwards from the head to the body around the genu [71]. In experienced hands, linear EUS has been shown to have a sensitivity of 95% and an overall accuracy of 97% for the diagnosis of PD when the main pancreatic duct can be well visualized [70].

On radial endosonography, absence of the “stack sign” has been suggested as a useful criterion for diagnosing PD [72]. This sign is shown from the duodenal bulb with the inflated balloon, visualizing in parallel the distal common bile duct, ventral pancreatic duct, and the portal vein in parallel being stacked together (Fig. 3). The bile duct is the closest to the transducer. Other signs are the “crossed duct sign” (bulb view showing Santorini duct crossing the common bile duct) [69]. The diagnosis of PD can be suggested by negative stack sign or positive cross duct sign (Fig. 4). A dominant Santorini duct (a Santorini duct diameter more than the ventral pancreatic duct diameter) can also be a sign of PD. The diagnosis of PD is excluded if the pancreatic duct can be visualized continuously from the major papilla and shows the ventral-dorsal transition from the hypoechoic ventral anlage to the hyperechoic dorsal bud [69, 70].

Fig. 3.

EUS of the papillary region with normal anatomical visualization of the stack sign (CBD, common bile duct; PD, pancreatic duct; PV, portal vein).

Fig. 3.

EUS of the papillary region with normal anatomical visualization of the stack sign (CBD, common bile duct; PD, pancreatic duct; PV, portal vein).

Close modal
Fig. 4.

EUS of a PD with calcifying chronic pancreatitis. EUS diagnosis is supported by the lack of the stack sign (CBD, common bile duct; PD, pancreatic duct; PV, portal vein; *calcification).

Fig. 4.

EUS of a PD with calcifying chronic pancreatitis. EUS diagnosis is supported by the lack of the stack sign (CBD, common bile duct; PD, pancreatic duct; PV, portal vein; *calcification).

Close modal

Intrapancreatic Accessory Spleen

Intrapancreatic accessory spleen (IAS) is an infrequent congenital finding that may mimic other pancreatic pathologies (particularly neuroendocrine tumors) and sometimes could be a cause of unnecessary distal pancreatic resection [73]. The prevalence is lower than 1% in the general population [74]. Rodriguez et al. [75] described IAS as a homogeneous, well-defined, round, isoechoic or hypoechoic mass with smooth borders on EUS. Kim et al. [74] reported only a fair (Kappa 0.37) interobserver agreement in judging IAS as a pancreatic lesion or not. They also reported that the sensitivity and specificity of EUS for IAS were greater than 70% [74]. However, in some cases, where the suspicion of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm (NET) is high and if combined imaging modalities like EUS, MRI, CT, or PET are not conclusive, EUS-FNA is required to establish definitive diagnosis. Usually, due to the small size of the lesion, vascularization patterns cannot be sufficiently distinguished from a small pancreatic NET. Some older reports described a prolonged enhancement (up to 3–5 min) on the delayed hepatosplenic phase during contrast-enhanced US imaging [76, 77]. In case of doubt, it is suggested to perform dynamic real‐time EUS imaging with careful transducer movement, and in some cases, the connection to the spleen with a bridge of splenic tissue can be shown, which is called “the bridge sign” [78].

Pancreatic Fibrosis in the Elderly

During aging, the pancreas shows changes similar to those observed in chronic pancreatitis including calculi, main pancreatic duct dilation or narrowing [46] and FI [79] in the examination with EUS (Fig. 5). Increasing fibrosis with age is also pointed out by EUS-guided semiquantitative elastography that revealed that the pancreas becomes significantly stiffer with increasing age [80], in line with the findings of pathological studies [81].

Fig. 5.

Example of a pancreas in elderly patients. The pancreatic duct (1) is irregular with slight proximal dilation without an obstructive cause. The pancreatic parenchyma shows hyperechoic foci which correspond to fibrosis (*). Other hyperechoic spots correspond histologically to FI, which can be diffuse (see Fig. 2) or focal.

Fig. 5.

Example of a pancreas in elderly patients. The pancreatic duct (1) is irregular with slight proximal dilation without an obstructive cause. The pancreatic parenchyma shows hyperechoic foci which correspond to fibrosis (*). Other hyperechoic spots correspond histologically to FI, which can be diffuse (see Fig. 2) or focal.

Close modal

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most lethal malignancies worldwide, with a low survival rate due to its late diagnosis [82]. Studies have shown that EUS can detect small pancreatic lesions that may not be detected by other imaging techniques such as CT or MRI [4], particularly when they are smaller than 3 cm [83]. Moreover, EUS-guided FNA can provide a histological diagnosis of suspicious lesions [12]. In addition, enhanced imaging techniques further aid in the evaluation of pancreatic masses, e.g., elastography (that measures the relative stiffness of tissues based on its resistance to compression) [84] and contrast-enhanced EUS [85] or artificial intelligence [86]. Some promising observations have also been made with new color Doppler techniques for the differentiation between pancreatic adenocarcinoma and chronic pancreatitis [87]. A recent meta-analysis for CE-EUS showed a pooled sensitivity, specificity, and AUROC of 94%, 89%, and 0.97 for the diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma [88]. CE-EUS combines the advantage of high-resolution US with the ability to visualize micro- and microvasculature without extravasation of contrast medium into the interstitium. This enables a superior visualization of vascularization patterns compared to all other imaging modalities [89, 90].

An adequate US machine for CE-EUS (equipped with low-MI contrast imaging mode) is needed. The recommended dose of contrast medium (i.e., for SonoVue® is 4.8 mL under most circumstances) according to the manufacturer should be applied. For extravascular applications (i.e., visualization of cavities and ducts), a few drops of contrast medium can be diluted in 10–100 mL saline solution [89].

The results of contrast-enhanced EUS can be objectivized using software quantifying the enhancement of contrast medium with time-intensity curves [91]. A particular role of EUS has been suggested for the differentiation of focal inflammatory masses that can present with a hypoechoic appearance in B-mode EUS and may exhibit diffuse iso/hyperenhancement using CE-EUS [92]. Such hyperenhancement can be helpful to distinguish focal autoimmune pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer since inflammatory diseases usually show some degree of enhancement [93‒95]. CE-EUS combined with elastography plays a fundamental role in complementary diagnostic of focal pancreatic masses [96]. However, due to a specificity lower than 90%, the authors recommend to combine imaging and biopsy techniques for a correct diagnosis. Metastases to the pancreas, synchronic or metachronic, can also show hyperenhancement – like in renal cell carcinoma metastasis – so in such cases, histology may be required [97, 98].

Several other solid lesions can undergo cystic degeneration. This latter category accounts not only for pancreatic carcinomas with compression of the pancreatic duct but also for pancreatic cystic NETs, degenerated IPMN with sign of malignancy, where a solid hypoenhancing component or nodes are detected, and solid pseudopapillary neoplasms. On EUS, NET shows hyperenhancement on CE-EUS, also in case of cystic appearance [99, 100], while solid pseudopapillary neoplasms more frequently shows calcifications, isoechogenicity, or hyperechogenicity, as well as an isoechoic or hypoechoic vascular pattern or the presence of the alveolus nest sign on contrast medium US [101]. The evaluation and differential diagnosis of other pancreatic cystic lesion is outside the scope of this review, and we refer to current guidelines on management of pancreatic cysts [102‒104].

Contrast medium also plays a role in guiding tissue acquisition by EUS as it enables diagnosis with a lower number of fine-needle passes [105, 106]. For EUS-guided tissue acquisition, different needle sizes from 19 to 25 gauge are available. Smaller needles may be more easily directed to a target lesion, particularly in lesion located deep in the GI tract. A recent meta-analysis showed that EUS fine-needle biopsy was more accurate than EUS-FNA (where cytology only is evaluated) to diagnose pancreatic cancer [107, 108] and non-pancreatic lesion [109]. Among fine-needle biopsy needles, Franseen and fork-tip needles showed the highest performance for tissue sampling in the evaluation of pancreatic masses [109, 110].

New techniques are awaited since all the aforementioned techniques have limitations in the context of calcification or long-standing chronic pancreatitis. A special rare type of focal chronic pancreatitis that have to be distinguished from autoimmune pancreatitis (Fig. 6) is paraduodenal pancreatitis. It represents a diagnostic challenge for endosonographers and pancreatologists since due to the frequent occurrence of duodenal obstruction, cystic lesions in the duodenal wall, or calcifications, EUS is not able to play to its strengths. This makes the differential diagnosis with pancreatic groove carcinoma, low-differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma, and duodenal adenocarcinoma difficult since also histology usually cannot help in diagnosis of paraduodenal pancreatitis [50, 111]. Moreover, it should be remembered that chronic pancreatitis itself is a risk factor for pancreatic cancer and, on the other hand, a cause of pancreatitis can be the pancreatic duct obstruction by a pancreatic neoplasm [112].

Fig. 6.

EUS in the transgastric position showing an autoimmune pancreatitis before steroid therapy. The pancreatic body is “sausage”-like enlarged with hypoechoic areas. The main pancreatic duct (1) is not dilated with hyperechoic borders.

Fig. 6.

EUS in the transgastric position showing an autoimmune pancreatitis before steroid therapy. The pancreatic body is “sausage”-like enlarged with hypoechoic areas. The main pancreatic duct (1) is not dilated with hyperechoic borders.

Close modal

An additional tool that requires further validation is real-time EUS-guided confocal endomicroscopy. After an inconclusive biopsy results, this new technique could help rule out malignancy and unnecessary surgery [113]. A new promising but not yet widespread imaging technique is three-dimensional contrast-enhanced EUS. It may play a role in cancer to depict the relationship of vessels, bile duct, pancreatic duct, and the primary lesion to evaluate resection [114].

During the past decade, the use of EUS deeply developed and it has now a significant impact and the highest role in clinical diagnostics and therapy in pancreatology. The rapid increase in the development of several diagnostic tools makes EUS an outstanding unique technique in the evaluation of pancreatic diseases that cannot be replaced from alternative cross-sectional imaging techniques.

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Francesco Vitali wrote the article. Sebastian Zundler, Daniel Jesper, Dane Wildner, Deike Strobel, Luca Frulloni, and Markus F. Neurath critically revised the manuscript.

1.
Foley
WD
,
Stewart
ET
,
Lawson
TL
,
Geenan
J
,
Loguidice
J
,
Maher
L
.
Computed tomography, ultrasonography, and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the diagnosis of pancreatic disease: a comparative study
.
Gastrointest Radiol
.
1980 Feb 1
5
1
29
35
.
2.
Erchinger
FG
,
Dimcevski
G
,
Engjom
T
,
Gilja
OH
.
Transabdominal ultrasonography of the pancreas: basic and new aspects
.
Imaging Med
.
2011
;
3
(
4
):
411
22
.
3.
Engjom
T
,
Sangnes
DA
,
Havre
RF
,
Erchinger
F
,
Pham
KD
,
Haldorsen
IS
.
Diagnostic accuracy of transabdominal ultrasound in chronic pancreatitis
.
Ultrasound Med Biol
.
2017 Apr
43
4
735
43
.
4.
DeWitt
J
,
Devereaux
B
,
Chriswell
M
,
McGreevy
K
,
Howard
T
,
Imperiale
TF
.
Comparison of endoscopic ultrasonography and multidetector computed tomography for detecting and staging pancreatic cancer
.
Ann Intern Med
.
2004 Nov 16
141
10
753
63
.
5.
Du
C
,
Chai
NL
,
Linghu
EQ
,
Li
HK
,
Sun
LH
,
Jiang
L
.
Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in assessment of detailed structures of pancreatic cystic neoplasms
.
World J Gastroenterol
.
2017 May 7
23
17
3184
92
.
6.
DiMagno
EP
,
DiMagno
MJ
.
Endoscopic ultrasonography: from the origins to routine EUS
.
Dig Dis Sci
.
2016 Feb
61
2
342
53
.
7.
Seifert
H
,
Fusaroli
P
,
Arcidiacono
PG
,
Braden
B
,
Herth
F
,
Hocke
M
.
Controversies in EUS: do we need miniprobes
.
Endosc Ultrasound
.
2021 Jul-Aug
10
4
246
69
.
8.
Soriano
A
,
Castells
A
,
Ayuso
C
,
Ayuso
JR
,
de Caralt
MT
,
Gines
MA
.
Preoperative staging and tumor resectability assessment of pancreatic cancer: prospective study comparing endoscopic ultrasonography, helical computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and angiography
.
Am J Gastroenterol
.
2004 Mar
99
3
492
501
.
9.
Rosch
T
.
Endoscopic ultrasonography artifacts and problems of interpretation
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
1996 Feb
43
2
S10
2
.
10.
Rosch
T
,
Lightdale
CJ
,
Botet
JF
,
Boyce
GA
,
Sivak
MV
Jr
,
Yasuda
K
.
Localization of pancreatic endocrine tumors by endoscopic ultrasonography
.
N Engl J Med
.
1992 Jun 25
326
26
1721
6
.
11.
Schumacher
B
,
Lubke
HJ
,
Frieling
T
,
Strohmeyer
G
,
Starke
AA
.
Prospective study on the detection of insulinomas by endoscopic ultrasonography
.
Endoscopy
.
1996 Mar
28
3
273
6
.
12.
Ardengh
JC
,
de Paulo
GA
,
Ferrari
AP
.
Pancreatic carcinomas smaller than 3.0 cm: endosonography (EUS) in diagnosis, staging and prediction of resectability
.
HPB
.
2003
;
5
(
4
):
226
30
.
13.
Dietrich
CF
,
Sahai
AV
,
D’Onofrio
M
,
Will
U
,
Arcidiacono
PG
,
Petrone
MC
.
Differential diagnosis of small solid pancreatic lesions
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
2016 Dec
84
6
933
40
.
14.
Wani
S
,
Cote
GA
,
Keswani
R
,
Mullady
D
,
Azar
R
,
Murad
F
.
Learning curves for EUS by using cumulative sum analysis: implications for American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy recommendations for training
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
2013 Apr
77
4
558
65
.
15.
Wani
S
,
Hall
M
,
Keswani
RN
,
Aslanian
HR
,
Casey
B
,
Burbridge
R
.
Variation in aptitude of trainees in endoscopic ultrasonography, based on cumulative sum analysis
.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol
.
2015 Jul
13
7
1318
25
.e2.
16.
ASGE Training Committee
Adler
DG
,
Bakis
G
,
Coyle
WJ
,
DeGregorio
B
,
Dua
KS
.
Principles of training in GI endoscopy
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
2012 Feb
75
2
231
5
.
17.
ASGE Training Committee
DiMaio
CJ
,
Mishra
G
,
McHenry
L
,
Adler
DG
,
Coyle
WJ
.
EUS core curriculum
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
2012 Sep
76
3
476
81
.
18.
Arya
N
,
Sahai
AV
,
Paquin
SC
.
Credentialing for endoscopic ultrasound: a proposal for Canadian guidelines
.
Endosc Ultrasound
.
2016 Jan-Feb
5
1
4
7
.
19.
ASGE Standards of Practice Committee
Faulx
AL
,
Lightdale
JR
,
Acosta
RD
,
Agrawal
D
,
Bruining
DH
.
Guidelines for privileging, credentialing, and proctoring to perform GI endoscopy
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
2017 Feb
85
2
273
81
.
20.
Johnson
G
,
Webster
G
,
Boškoski
I
,
Campos
S
,
Golder
SK
,
Schlag
C
.
Curriculum for ERCP and endoscopic ultrasound training in europe: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) position statement
.
Endoscopy
.
2021 Oct
53
10
1071
87
.
21.
Thiruvengadam
SS
,
Chuang
J
,
Huang
R
,
Girotra
M
,
Park
WG
.
Chronic pancreatitis changes in high-risk individuals for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
2019 Apr
89
4
842
51
.e1.
22.
Petrone
MC
,
Arcidiacono
PG
,
Perri
F
,
Carrara
S
,
Boemo
C
,
Testoni
PA
.
Chronic pancreatitis-like changes detected by endoscopic ultrasound in subjects without signs of pancreatic disease: do these indicate age-related changes, effects of xenobiotics, or early chronic pancreatitis
.
Pancreatology
.
2010
;
10
(
5
):
597
602
.
23.
Mortensen
MB
,
Fristrup
C
,
Holm
FS
,
Pless
T
,
Durup
J
,
Ainsworth
AP
.
Prospective evaluation of patient tolerability, satisfaction with patient information, and complications in endoscopic ultrasonography
.
Endoscopy
.
2005 Feb
37
2
146
53
.
24.
Razpotnik
M
,
Bota
S
,
Essler
G
,
Weber-Eibel
J
,
Peck-Radosavljevic
M
.
Impact of endoscopist experience, patient age and comorbidities on dose of sedation and sedation-related complications by endoscopic ultrasound
.
Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol
.
2022 Feb 1
34
2
177
83
.
25.
Jenssen
C
,
Faiss
S
,
Nurnberg
D
.
[Complications of endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic ultrasound-guided interventions: results of a survey among German centers]
.
Z Gastroenterol
.
2008 Oct
46
10
1177
84
.
26.
Eloubeidi
MA
,
Tamhane
A
,
Lopes
TL
,
Morgan
DE
,
Cerfolio
RJ
.
Cervical esophageal perforations at the time of endoscopic ultrasound: a prospective evaluation of frequency, outcomes, and patient management
.
Am J Gastroenterol
.
2009 Jan
104
1
53
6
.
27.
Eloubeidi
MA
,
Chen
VK
,
Eltoum
IA
,
Jhala
D
,
Chhieng
DC
,
Jhala
N
.
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy of patients with suspected pancreatic cancer: diagnostic accuracy and acute and 30-day complications
.
Am J Gastroenterol
.
2003 Dec
98
12
2663
8
.
28.
Barresi
L
,
Crino
SF
,
Fabbri
C
,
Attili
F
,
Poley
JW
,
Carrara
S
.
Endoscopic ultrasound-through-the-needle biopsy in pancreatic cystic lesions: a multicenter study
.
Dig Endosc
.
2018 Nov
30
6
760
70
.
29.
Guzman-Calderon
E
,
Martinez-Moreno
B
,
Casellas
JA
,
de Madaria
E
,
Aparicio
JR
.
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided, through-the-needle forceps biopsy for diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesions: a systematic review
.
Endosc Int Open
.
2020 Sep
8
9
E1123
33
.
30.
Veitch
AM
,
Vanbiervliet
G
,
Gershlick
AH
,
Boustiere
C
,
Baglin
TP
,
Smith
LA
.
Endoscopy in patients on antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy, including direct oral anticoagulants: British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) and European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) guidelines
.
Endoscopy
.
2016 Apr
48
4
385
402
.
31.
Kawakubo
K
,
Yane
K
,
Eto
K
,
Ishiwatari
H
,
Ehira
N
,
Haba
S
.
A prospective multicenter study evaluating bleeding risk after endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in patients prescribed antithrombotic agents
.
Gut Liver
.
2018 May 15
12
3
353
9
.
32.
Armellini
E
,
Facciorusso
A
,
Crino
SF
.
Efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided radiofrequency ablation for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a systematic review and metanalysis
.
Medicina (Kaunas)
.
2023 Feb 14
59
2
359
.
33.
Gress
F
,
Michael
H
,
Gelrud
D
,
Patel
P
,
Gottlieb
K
,
Singh
F
.
EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration of the pancreas: evaluation of pancreatitis as a complication
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
2002 Dec
56
6
864
7
.
34.
Eloubeidi
MA
,
Gress
FG
,
Savides
TJ
,
Wiersema
MJ
,
Kochman
ML
,
Ahmad
NA
.
Acute pancreatitis after EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses: a pooled analysis from EUS centers in the United States
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
2004 Sep
60
3
385
9
.
35.
Katanuma
A
,
Maguchi
H
,
Yane
K
,
Hashigo
S
,
Kin
T
,
Kaneko
M
.
Factors predictive of adverse events associated with endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions
.
Dig Dis Sci
.
2013 Jul
58
7
2093
9
.
36.
O'Toole
D
,
Palazzo
L
,
Arotcarena
R
,
Dancour
A
,
Aubert
A
,
Hammel
P
.
Assessment of complications of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
2001 Apr
53
4
470
4
.
37.
Lee
LS
,
Saltzman
JR
,
Bounds
BC
,
Poneros
JM
,
Brugge
WR
,
Thompson
CC
.
EUS-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic cysts: a retrospective analysis of complications and their predictors
.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol
.
2005 Mar
3
3
231
6
.
38.
Siddiqui
AA
,
Shahid
H
,
Shah
A
,
Khurana
T
,
Huntington
W
,
Ghumman
SS
.
High risk of acute pancreatitis after endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of side branch intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms
.
Endosc Ultrasound
.
2015 Apr-Jun
4
2
109
14
.
39.
Sedlack
R
,
Affi
A
,
Vazquez-Sequeiros
E
,
Norton
ID
,
Clain
JE
,
Wiersema
MJ
.
Utility of EUS in the evaluation of cystic pancreatic lesions
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
2002 Oct
56
4
543
7
.
40.
Cote
GA
,
Hovis
CE
,
Kohlmeier
C
,
Ammar
T
,
Al-Lehibi
A
,
Azar
RR
.
Training in EUS-guided fine needle aspiration: safety and diagnostic yield of attending supervised, trainee-directed FNA from the onset of training
.
Diagn Ther Endosc
.
2011
;
2011
:
378540
.
41.
Dumonceau
JM
,
Deprez
PH
,
Jenssen
C
,
Iglesias-Garcia
J
,
Larghi
A
,
Vanbiervliet
G
.
Indications, results, and clinical impact of Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling in gastroenterology: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) clinical guideline - updated january 2017
.
Endoscopy
.
2017 Jul
49
7
695
714
.
42.
Minaga
K
,
Takenaka
M
,
Katanuma
A
,
Kitano
M
,
Yamashita
Y
,
Kamata
K
.
Needle tract seeding: an overlooked rare complication of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration
.
Oncology
.
2017
93
Suppl 1
107
12
.
43.
Archibugi
L
,
Ponz de Leon Pisani
R
,
Petrone
MC
,
Balzano
G
,
Falconi
M
,
Doglioni
C
.
Needle-tract seeding of pancreatic cancer after EUS-FNA: a systematic review of case reports and discussion of management
.
Cancers
.
2022 Dec 12
14
24
6130
.
44.
Petrone
MC
,
Terracciano
F
,
Perri
F
,
Carrara
S
,
Cavestro
GM
,
Mariani
A
.
Pancreatic abnormalities detected by Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) in patients without clinical signs of pancreatic disease: any difference between standard and Rosemont classification scoring
.
Pancreatology
.
2014 May-Jun
14
3
227
30
.
45.
Wiersema
MJ
,
Wiersema
LM
.
Endosonography of the pancreas: normal variation versus changes of early chronic pancreatitis
.
Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am
.
1995 Jul
5
3
487
96
.
46.
Rajan
E
,
Clain
JE
,
Levy
MJ
,
Norton
ID
,
Wang
KK
,
Wiersema
MJ
.
Age-related changes in the pancreas identified by EUS: a prospective evaluation
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
2005 Mar
61
3
401
6
.
47.
Savides
TJ
,
Gress
FG
,
Zaidi
SA
,
Ikenberry
SO
,
Hawes
RH
.
Detection of embryologic ventral pancreatic parenchyma with endoscopic ultrasound
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
1996 Jan
43
1
14
9
.
48.
Atri
M
,
Nazarnia
S
,
Mehio
A
,
Reinhold
C
,
Bret
PM
.
Hypoechogenic embryologic ventral aspect of the head and uncinate process of the pancreas: in vitro correlation of US with histopathologic findings
.
Radiology
.
1994 Feb
190
2
441
4
.
49.
Coulier
B
.
[Hypoechogenic aspects of the ventral embryonic cephalic pancreas: a large prospective clinical study]
.
J Belge Radiol
.
1996 Jun
79
3
120
4
.
50.
Vitali
F
,
Strobel
D
,
Frulloni
L
,
Heinrich
M
,
Pfeifer
L
,
Goertz
RS
.
The importance of pancreatic inflammation in endosonographic diagnostics of solid pancreatic masses
.
Med Ultrason
.
2018 Dec 8
20
4
427
35
.
51.
Bhutani
MS
,
Gress
FG
,
Giovannini
M
,
Erickson
RA
,
Catalano
MF
,
Chak
A
.
The No Endosonographic Detection of Tumor (NEST) Study: a case series of pancreatic cancers missed on endoscopic ultrasonography
.
Endoscopy
.
2004 May
36
5
385
9
.
52.
Smits
MM
,
van Geenen
EJ
.
The clinical significance of pancreatic steatosis
.
Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol
.
2011 Mar
8
3
169
77
.
53.
Sepe
PS
,
Ohri
A
,
Sanaka
S
,
Berzin
TM
,
Sekhon
S
,
Bennett
G
.
A prospective evaluation of fatty pancreas by using EUS
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
2011 May
73
5
987
93
.
54.
Lee
SS
,
Park
SH
,
Kim
HJ
,
Kim
SY
,
Kim
MY
,
Kim
DY
.
Non-invasive assessment of hepatic steatosis: prospective comparison of the accuracy of imaging examinations
.
J Hepatol
.
2010 Apr
52
4
579
85
.
55.
Bohte
AE
,
van Werven
JR
,
Bipat
S
,
Stoker
J
.
The diagnostic accuracy of US, CT, MRI and 1H-MRS for the evaluation of hepatic steatosis compared with liver biopsy: a meta-analysis
.
Eur Radiol
.
2011 Jan
21
1
87
97
.
56.
Olsen
TS
.
Lipomatosis of the pancreas in autopsy material and its relation to age and overweight
.
Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand A
.
1978 Sep
86A
5
367
73
.
57.
Grigorieva
IN
,
Efimova
OV
,
Tov
NL
,
Suvorova
TS
.
[Non-Alcoholic Fatty Pancreatic Disease (NAFPD) and the metabolic syndrome: initiating factor or additional component?]
.
Eksp Klin Gastroenterol
.
2015
9
86
91
.
58.
Sotoudehmanesh
R
,
Tahmasbi
A
,
Sadeghi
A
,
Hosseini
H
,
Mohamadnejad
M
.
The prevalence of nonalcoholic fatty pancreas by endoscopic ultrasonography
.
Pancreas
.
2019 Oct
48
9
1220
4
.
59.
Chan
TT
,
Tse
YK
,
Lui
RN
,
Wong
GL
,
Chim
AM
,
Kong
AP
.
Fatty pancreas is independently associated with subsequent diabetes mellitus development: a 10-year prospective cohort study
.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol
.
2022 Sep
20
9
2014
22
.e4.
60.
Muftah
AA
,
Pecha
RL
,
Riojas Barrett
M
,
Abidi
WM
,
Patel
KK
,
Keihanian
T
.
Pancreatic parenchymal changes seen on endoscopic ultrasound are dynamic in the setting of fatty pancreas: a short-term follow-up study
.
Pancreatology
.
2022 Dec
22
8
1187
94
.
61.
Fujii
M
,
Ohno
Y
,
Yamada
M
,
Kamada
Y
,
Miyoshi
E
.
Impact of fatty pancreas and lifestyle on the development of subclinical chronic pancreatitis in healthy people undergoing a medical checkup
.
Environ Health Prev Med
.
2019 Feb 7
24
1
10
.
62.
Calculli
L
,
Festi
D
,
Pezzilli
R
.
Enlarged pancreas: not always a cancer
.
Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int
.
2015 Feb
14
1
107
8
.
63.
Coulier
B
.
Pancreatic lipomatosis: an extensive pictorial review
.
J Belg Soc Radiol
.
2016 Feb 23
100
1
39
.
64.
Masuda
A
,
Tanaka
H
,
Ikegawa
T
,
Matsuda
T
,
Shiomi
H
,
Takenaka
M
.
A case of lipomatous pseudohypertrophy of the pancreas diagnosed by EUS-FNA
.
Clin J Gastroenterol
.
2012 Aug
5
4
282
6
.
65.
Fogel
EL
,
Toth
TG
,
Lehman
GA
,
DiMagno
MJ
,
DiMagno
EP
.
Does endoscopic therapy favorably affect the outcome of patients who have recurrent acute pancreatitis and pancreas divisum
.
Pancreas
.
2007 Jan
34
1
21
45
.
66.
DiMagno
MJ
,
Wamsteker
EJ
.
Pancreas divisum
.
Curr Gastroenterol Rep
.
2011 Apr
13
2
150
6
.
67.
Noone
PG
,
Zhou
Z
,
Silverman
LM
,
Jowell
PS
,
Knowles
MR
,
Cohn
JA
.
Cystic fibrosis gene mutations and pancreatitis risk: relation to epithelial ion transport and trypsin inhibitor gene mutations
.
Gastroenterology
.
2001 Dec
121
6
1310
9
.
68.
DiMagno
MJ
,
Dimagno
EP
.
Pancreas divisum does not cause pancreatitis, but associates with CFTR mutations
.
Am J Gastroenterol
.
2012 Feb
107
2
318
20
.
69.
Sharma
M
,
Pathak
A
,
Rameshbabu
CS
,
Rai
P
,
Kirnake
V
,
Shoukat
A
.
Imaging of pancreas divisum by linear-array endoscopic ultrasonography
.
Endosc Ultrasound
.
2016 Jan-Feb
5
1
21
9
.
70.
Lai
R
,
Freeman
ML
,
Cass
OW
,
Mallery
S
.
Accurate diagnosis of pancreas divisum by linear-array endoscopic ultrasonography
.
Endoscopy
.
2004 Aug
36
8
705
9
.
71.
Rana
SS
,
Bhasin
DK
,
Sharma
V
,
Rao
C
,
Singh
K
.
Role of endoscopic ultrasound in the diagnosis of pancreas divisum
.
Endosc Ultrasound
.
2013 Jan
2
1
7
10
.
72.
Rana
SS
,
Gonen
C
,
Vilmann
P
.
Endoscopic ultrasound and pancreas divisum
.
JOP
.
2012 May 10
13
3
252
7
.
73.
Vitali
F
,
Hansen
T
,
Kiesslich
R
,
Heinrich
S
,
Kumar
A
,
Mildenberger
P
.
Frequency and characterization of benign lesions in patients undergoing surgery for the suspicion of solid pancreatic neoplasm
.
Pancreas
.
2014 Nov
43
8
1329
33
.
74.
Kim
GE
,
Morris
JD
,
Anand
N
,
DePalma
F
,
Greenwald
BD
,
Kim
RE
.
Recognizing intrapancreatic accessory spleen via EUS: interobserver variability
.
Endosc Ultrasound
.
2019 Nov-Dec
8
6
392
7
.
75.
Rodriguez
E
,
Netto
G
,
Li
QK
.
Intrapancreatic accessory spleen: a case report and review of literature
.
Diagn Cytopathol
.
2013 May
41
5
466
9
.
76.
Kim
SH
,
Lee
JM
,
Lee
JY
,
Han
JK
,
Choi
BI
.
Contrast-enhanced sonography of intrapancreatic accessory spleen in six patients
.
AJR Am J Roentgenol
.
2007 Feb
188
2
422
8
.
77.
Kim
SH
,
Lee
JM
,
Han
JK
,
Lee
JY
,
Kim
KW
,
Cho
KC
.
Intrapancreatic accessory spleen: findings on MR Imaging, CT, US and scintigraphy, and the pathologic analysis
.
Korean J Radiol
.
2008 Mar-Apr
9
2
162
74
.
78.
Bhutani
MS
,
Singh
BS
,
Cazacu
IM
,
Saftoiu
A
.
Differentiating intrapancreatic accessory spleen from a pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor or metastasis by the “bridge sign”
.
Endosc Ultrasound
.
2019 Jul-Aug
8
4
281
2
.
79.
Bhalla
S
,
Kuchel
GA
,
Pandol
S
,
Bishehsari
F
.
Association of pancreatic fatty infiltration with age and metabolic syndrome is sex-dependent
.
Gastro Hep Advances
.
2022
;
1
(
3
):
344
9
.
80.
Janssen
J
,
Papavassiliou
I
.
Effect of aging and diffuse chronic pancreatitis on pancreas elasticity evaluated using semiquantitative EUS elastography
.
Ultraschall Med
.
2014 Jun
35
3
253
8
.
81.
Detlefsen
S
,
Sipos
B
,
Feyerabend
B
,
Kloppel
G
.
Pancreatic fibrosis associated with age and ductal papillary hyperplasia
.
Virchows Arch
.
2005 Nov
447
5
800
5
.
82.
Gordon-Dseagu
VL
,
Devesa
SS
,
Goggins
M
,
Stolzenberg-Solomon
R
.
Pancreatic cancer incidence trends: evidence from the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) population-based data
.
Int J Epidemiol
.
2018 Apr 1
47
2
427
39
.
83.
Othman
MO
,
Wallace
MB
.
The role of endoscopic ultrasonography in the diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer
.
Gastroenterol Clin North Am
.
2012 Mar
41
1
179
88
.
84.
Cho
IR
,
Jeong
S-H
,
Kang
H
,
Kim
EJ
,
Kim
YS
,
Jeon
S
.
Diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasound elastography for differential diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: a propensity score-matched analysis
.
Pancreatology
.
2023
;
23
(
1
):
105
11
.
85.
Shin
CM
,
Villa
E
.
The efficiency of contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) combined with EUS elastography for pancreatic cancer diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
.
Ultrasonography
.
2023 Jan
42
1
20
30
.
86.
Kuwahara
T
,
Hara
K
,
Mizuno
N
,
Haba
S
,
Okuno
N
,
Kuraishi
Y
.
Artificial intelligence using deep learning analysis of endoscopic ultrasonography images for the differential diagnosis of pancreatic masses
.
Endoscopy
.
2023 Feb
55
2
140
9
.
87.
Dyrla
P
,
Lubas
A
,
Gil
J
,
Saracyn
M
,
Gonciarz
M
.
Comparison of the color Doppler vascularity index in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma and chronic pancreatitis from a single center in Poland
.
Med Sci Monit
.
2022 Feb 22
28
e935249
.
88.
Gong
TT
,
Hu
DM
,
Zhu
Q
.
Contrast-enhanced EUS for differential diagnosis of pancreatic mass lesions: a meta-analysis
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
2012 Aug
76
2
301
9
.
89.
Dietrich
CF
,
Sharma
M
,
Hocke
M
.
Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound
.
Endosc Ultrasound
.
2012 Oct
1
3
130
6
.
90.
Sidhu
PS
,
Cantisani
V
,
Dietrich
CF
,
Gilja
OH
,
Saftoiu
A
,
Bartels
E
.
The EFSUMB guidelines and recommendations for the clinical practice of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound (CEUS) in non-hepatic applications: update 2017 (long version)
.
Ultraschall Med
.
2018 Apr
39
2
e2
44
.
91.
Imazu
H
,
Kanazawa
K
,
Mori
N
,
Ikeda
K
,
Kakutani
H
,
Sumiyama
K
.
Novel quantitative perfusion analysis with contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS for differentiation of autoimmune pancreatitis from pancreatic carcinoma
.
Scand J Gastroenterol
.
2012 Jul
47
7
853
60
.
92.
Seicean
A
,
Mosteanu
O
,
Seicean
R
.
Maximizing the endosonography: the role of contrast harmonics, elastography and confocal endomicroscopy
.
World J Gastroenterol
.
2017 Jan 7
23
1
25
41
.
93.
Hocke
M
,
Schulze
E
,
Gottschalk
P
,
Topalidis
T
,
Dietrich
CF
.
Contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound in discrimination between focal pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer
.
World J Gastroenterol
.
2006 Jan 14
12
2
246
50
.
94.
Dietrich
CF
,
Cui
XW
,
Schreiber-Dietrich
DG
,
Ignee
A
.
EFSUMB guidelines 2011: comments and illustrations
.
Ultraschall Med
.
2012 Jul
33
Suppl 1
S11
21
.
95.
Gheonea
DI
,
Streba
CT
,
Ciurea
T
,
Săftoiu
A
.
Quantitative low mechanical index contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound for the differential diagnosis of chronic pseudotumoral pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer
.
BMC Gastroenterol
.
2013 Jan 3
13
2
.
96.
Costache
MI
,
Cazacu
IM
,
Dietrich
CF
,
Petrone
MC
,
Arcidiacono
PG
,
Giovannini
M
.
Clinical impact of strain histogram EUS elastography and contrast-enhanced EUS for the differential diagnosis of focal pancreatic masses: a prospective multicentric study
.
Endosc Ultrasound
.
2020 Mar-Apr
9
2
116
21
.
97.
DeWitt
J
,
Jowell
P
,
Leblanc
J
,
McHenry
L
,
McGreevy
K
,
Cramer
H
.
EUS-guided FNA of pancreatic metastases: a multicenter experience
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
2005 May
61
6
689
96
.
98.
Spadaccini
M
,
Conti Bellocchi
MC
,
Mangiavillano
B
,
Fantin
A
,
Rahal
D
,
Manfrin
E
.
Secondary tumors of the pancreas: a multicenter analysis of clinicopathological and endosonographic features
.
J Clin Med
.
2023 Apr 12
12
8
2829
.
99.
Kitano
M
,
Kudo
M
,
Yamao
K
,
Takagi
T
,
Sakamoto
H
,
Komaki
T
.
Characterization of small solid tumors in the pancreas: the value of contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography
.
Am J Gastroenterol
.
2012 Feb
107
2
303
10
.
100.
Vitali
F
,
Strobel
D
,
Pfeifer
L
,
Heinrich
M
,
Wachter
D
,
Neurath
MF
.
Neuroendocrine tumor of the pancreas with cystic appearance mimicking a progressive intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm: pitfall in medical imaging
.
Endoscopy
.
2016 0
48
S 01
E302
3
.
101.
Kataoka
K
,
Ishikawa
T
,
Ohno
E
,
Mizutani
Y
,
Iida
T
,
Furukawa
K
.
Differentiation between solid pseudopapillary neoplasm of the pancreas and nonfunctional pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm using endoscopic ultrasound
.
Pancreas
.
2022 Jan 1
51
1
106
11
.
102.
Del Chiaro
M
,
Verbeke
C
,
Salvia
R
,
Klöppel
G
,
Werner
J
,
McKay
C
.
European experts consensus statement on cystic tumours of the pancreas
.
Dig Liver Dis
.
2013
;
45
(
9
):
703
11
.
103.
Vege
SS
,
Ziring
B
,
Jain
R
,
Moayyedi
P
Clinical Guidelines Committee
American Gastroenterology Association
.
American gastroenterological association institute guideline on the diagnosis and management of asymptomatic neoplastic pancreatic cysts
.
Gastroenterology
.
2015 2015/04/01/
148
4
819
22
; quize12-3.
104.
Tanaka
M
,
Fernández-del Castillo
C
,
Kamisawa
T
,
Jang
JY
,
Levy
P
,
Ohtsuka
T
.
Revisions of international consensus Fukuoka guidelines for the management of IPMN of the pancreas
.
Pancreatology
.
2017 2017/09/01/
17
5
738
53
.
105.
Sugimoto
M
,
Takagi
T
,
Hikichi
T
,
Suzuki
R
,
Watanabe
K
,
Nakamura
J
.
Conventional versus contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration for diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: a prospective randomized trial
.
Pancreatology
.
2015 Sep-Oct
15
5
538
41
.
106.
Seicean
A
,
Badea
R
,
Moldovan-Pop
A
,
Vultur
S
,
Botan
EC
,
Zaharie
T
.
Harmonic contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasonography for the guidance of fine-needle aspiration in solid pancreatic masses
.
Ultraschall Med
.
2017 Apr
38
2
174
82
.
107.
Hassan
GM
,
Laporte
L
,
Paquin
SC
,
Menard
C
,
Sahai
AV
,
Masse
B
.
Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration versus endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle biopsy for pancreatic cancer diagnosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
.
Diagnostics
.
2022 Nov 25
12
12
2951
.
108.
van Riet
PA
,
Erler
NS
,
Bruno
MJ
,
Cahen
DL
.
Comparison of fine-needle aspiration and fine-needle biopsy devices for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid lesions: a systemic review and meta-analysis
.
Endoscopy
.
2021 Apr
53
4
411
23
.
109.
Ashat
M
,
Klair
JS
,
Rooney
SL
,
Vishal
SJ
,
Jensen
C
,
Sahar
N
.
Randomized controlled trial comparing the Franseen needle with the Fork-tip needle for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
2021 Jan
93
1
140
50
.e2.
110.
Gkolfakis
P
,
Crino
SF
,
Tziatzios
G
,
Ramai
D
,
Papaefthymiou
A
,
Papanikolaou
IS
.
Comparative diagnostic performance of end-cutting fine-needle biopsy needles for EUS tissue sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
2022 Jun
95
6
1067
77
.e15.
111.
Rana
SS
,
Sharma
R
,
Guleria
S
,
Gupta
R
.
Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) elastography and contrast enhanced EUS in groove pancreatitis
.
Indian J Gastroenterol
.
2018 Jan
37
1
70
1
.
112.
Parasher
G
,
Alasadi
R
,
Chang
KJ
.
Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) changes of Chronic Pancreatitis (CP) are common among patients with pancreatic cancer
.
Gastrointest Endosc
.
2002
55
:AB 250, abstract W 1560-.
113.
Giovannini
M
,
Caillol
F
,
Monges
G
,
Poizat
F
,
Lemaistre
AI
,
Pujol
B
.
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy in solid pancreatic masses
.
Endoscopy
.
2016 Oct
48
10
892
8
.
114.
Fritscher-Ravens
A
,
Knoefel
WT
,
Krause
C
,
Swain
CP
,
Brandt
L
,
Patel
K
.
Three-dimensional linear endoscopic ultrasound-feasibility of a novel technique applied for the detection of vessel involvement of pancreatic masses
.
Am J Gastroenterol
.
2005 Jun
100
6
1296
302
.