Endobiliary biopsy

INTRODUCTION

The diagnosis of biliary strictures remains a challenge,even in an era of considerable technologic advances regarding our current diagnostic tools.A biliary stricture is an area of stenosis in the intrahepatic or extrahepatic biliary tree (Figure 1).It can be the result of either malignant or benign pathologies,with a high prevalence of malignancy (two-third of cases)[1].Malignant strictures of the biliary system (MBS) are commonly divided into distal strictures (involving the common bile duct) and proximal strictures (involving the hepatic hilum and right and left hepatic ducts).Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is the most common cause of distal malignant stenosis,followed by cholangiocarcinoma,and,less commonly,ampullary or metastatic cancer.Proximal malignant strictures are due to cholangiocarcinoma,hepatocellular and gallbladder cancer or lymphoproliferative disorders,and metastatic lesions.The most common causes of a benign stricture include iatrogenic injury,chronic pancreatitis,primary sclerosing cholangitis,autoimmune diseases,and others.Biliary strictures are defined indeterminate when a clear diagnosis cannot be obtained after a non-invasive diagnostic workup and an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with biliary sampling.Their evaluation should be extremely careful given the noteworthy false-positive preoperative diagnosis of cancer,resulting in a 13%-24% resection rate of benign lesions[2].

But when the same thing happened the third time, the dragon lost his temper, and went down into the stable and took a whip and gave the horse a good beating

Differentiating between the nature of strictures and diagnosing the relative aetiology often require a complex diagnostic approach.The evaluation of biliary strictures consists of laboratory markers and invasive and non-invasive imaging examinations including focused abdominal ultrasound (US),computed tomography (CT),contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography,and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS).

Nevertheless,invasive imaging modalities combined with tissue sampling are almost always required to support the diagnosis of a suspected MBS.If a histological diagnosis is obtained through the first procedure,further invasive diagnostic modalities can be avoided and appropriate treatment can be started.Both endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC) and percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography endobiliary forceps biopsy (PTHC-EFB) have been valid procedures for a while for histological assessment of intrahepatic and/or extrahepatic biliary strictures.

EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) is nowadays the standard procedure for tissue sampling of solid pancreatic lesions because of its high diagnostic rate:In this setting,previous metaanalyses reported that the sensitivity rates of EUS-FNAB ranged from 85% to 89%[3].However,EUSFNAB has some limitations in cases of MBS other than pancreatic lesions,such as the frequent intraductal infiltrating type of cholangiocarcinoma.Furthermore,over the past 20 years,the technique of EUS-guided biliopancreatic lesion sampling has not gained widespread availability.

Currently,other endobiliary techniques for biliary tissue acquisition are increasing the possibility to obtain a definitive diagnosis:In fact,the “endobiliary approach” to suspect MBS is expanding past the more traditional ERCP and PTHC,through the use of novel slim biopsy forceps,to include transpapillary and percutaneous cholangioscopy,and intraductal ultrasound-guided biopsy (IDUS-G biopsy).

ENDOSCOPIC TECHNIQUES

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography

In 2017 Kwon

[13] reported a single experience of MBS sampling with the use of a custom-made prototype guide-wire assisted endobiliary forceps biopsy:Targeted sampling from the central area of the mass was easy and successful.

Theoretically,sufficient biliary tissue sampling provides adequate identification of the tissue’s specific features such as superficial intraductal spread and/or wall invasion,details that cannot be obtained by brush cytology.Despite a low-diagnostic sensitivity,brush cytology is still the first line ERCP sampling modality,because of its feasibility and safety.However,as trans-papillary forceps biopsy has got a higher sensitivity rate in comparison to brush cytology,it may play an important role in the pathological confirmation of MBS.

Several series reported malignancy detection rates with ERCP endobiliary forceps biopsy ranging from 33% to 71 % for pancreatic cancer and 44% to 89 % for cholangiocarcinoma[5].A more recent review by Korc and Sherman[6] reported detection rates for pancreatic cancers and cholangiocarcinoma of 37% and 63%,respectively.The poor sensitivity of endobiliary forceps biopsy is likely due to the blind modality of sampling under fluoroscopic guidance.In addition,MBS that mainly infiltrate the wall of the duct or incite extrinsic compression are challenging to be targeted through the ERCP tissue sampling modality.ERCP with trans-papillary biopsies are performed using forceps designed for standard endoscopes[6] that should provide an adequate sample of bile duct tissue deep to the epithelium.The biopsy forceps are introduced into the bile duct after sphincterotomy of the papilla,even though some studies described the forceps insertion modality without previous sphincterotomy[7].The forceps are pushed under fluoroscopic guidance to the level of the stricture to grasp specimens from the lower part of the stricture.The ideal number of specimens to perform has not been standardized,although several studies[5-8] suggest that at least three specimens should be obtained.

Then the knight said, It is very strange that the tree should belong to you, and yet that you have not the power to break anything from it! But they would have that the tree was theirs; and while they were saying this, Little Two-eyes rolled a couple of golden apples from under the cask, so that they lay at the knight s feet, for she was angry with Little One-eye and Little Three-eyes for not speaking the truth

To optimize the unsatisfying sensitivity of trans-papillary forceps biopsy,in 2011 Wright

[9] proposed a method of rapid on-site cytopathological evaluation (ROSE) through the cytologic preparation and analysis of forceps biopsy sampling made by an onsite cytopathologist (Smash protocol).In total,133 patients were enrolled in the study.A “smash” specimen sensibility of 72% was reported.

Another work[10] valued the yield of ERCP biliary biopsy sampling subjected to ROSE and reported that sensitivity for cancer diagnosis increased to 76%-97%.This gain suggests that ROSE modality may improve the sensitivity of ERCP forceps biopsy sampling.However,this resource is available only to a few tertiary referral centres.Adverse events related to endobiliary forceps biopsy sampling are rare:To date,the same minor and only a few major cases of haemobilia[8] and perforation of the common hepatic duct[11] have been described.

Novel slim biopsy forceps

Similarly,Kim

[30] designed a prospective randomized study on the accuracy of IDUS-guided trans-papillary biopsy and conventional biopsy on fluoroscopy in suspected MBS and 65 out of 72 patients enrolled in the study underwent ERCP with IDUS.

One afternoon while making rounds I d met him, curled in a fetal position. A pale, dried-up old man with a look of death, head half-buried under a blanket. He didn t budge1 when I introduced myself, and he said nothing when I referred to dinner “soon.”

PTEFB can be also performed under cholangioscopic/choledochoscopic guidance,which gives the operator the ability to directly visualize and target the pathologic tissue (Figure 3).After adequate sequential dilation of the transhepatic tract (with an introducer sheath of up to 11-16 F

7-8 F of fluoroscopy-guided PTEFB) a scope is positioned over a stiff guidewire and the forceps are inserted through its working channel.This approach has sensitivity and specificity exceeding 95% for diagnosing biliary malignancies despite its greater costs when compared to fluoroscopy-guided PTEFB and the need for specialized equipment and expertise[32,42,49,50].Due to the diameter of the cholangioscope and the risk of hemobilia after first puncture of the biliary ducts,percutaneous tract “maturation” for one week or more after placement of a 8-10 French biliary drainage is recommended to avoid hemorrhage and prevent peritonitis due to extra-hepatic bile leak,as well as progressive oversizing of the biliary tube reduces the subsequent trauma from cholangioscope insertion[51].Flexible endoscopes are preferred over the rigid ones due to their smaller diameter,better control and wider view;in addition,long endoscopes should be preferred,particularly in case of lesions in the distal common bile duct or in the contralateral ducts.Complication of transhepatic cholangioscopy include cholangitis,hemobilia,biloma or abscess formation,but in half of cases are related to the initial access and tract dilation,and can be avoidable with tract maturation[52].

Moreover,the diagnostic sensitivity for biliary strictures reported was just 60%,which is similar to those reported from studies carried out on conventional forceps biopsy.The benefits of using C-BF may be limited because of its lack of rotation torque ability;thus,only a curvature to the patient’s right-hand side can be performed:This feature leads to an adequate sampling of lesions located to the right intrahepatic bile duct (75%),in contrast to a poor success rate in procedures that involved selecting the left intrahepatic bile duct (31%).

Another novel slim biopsy forceps,with a soft and thinner shaft of 1.8 mm (Radial Jaw 4P,Boston Scientific,Boston,MA,United States),has been developed to enable the jaws to pivot onto the targeted biopsy site for better tissue grasping.To evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of this novel biopsy device in the diagnosis of MBS,in 2017 Yamamoto

[12] tested it on a cohort of 360 patients who underwent ERCP for biliary strictures.That study showed a higher sensitivity than previous studies of transpapillary bile duct biopsies:In fact,the overall sensitivity and accuracy were 69.6% and 78.8%,respectively.The sensitivity was 75.6% in cholangiocarcinoma,64% in pancreatic cancer,and 57.1% in metastasis.In cholangiocarcinoma,a lower sensitivity was observed for perihilar lesions (68.7%) rather than for distal stricture (83.1%).A better sensitivity has been reported for longer stenosis of pancreatic cancer and metastasis.These results suggest that trans-papillary forceps biopsy should be performed in consideration of the stricture level,stricture length,and cancer type.Actually,a lower sensitivity was observed for the perihilar MBS rather than for the distal one.This may be due to the features of the strictures:Narrow,smooth,and angled lesions could lower the biopsy forceps ability to hit the targeted area.Moreover,the distance of the MBS from the papilla could reduce the possibility of precisely grasping the lesion.In contrast,a better sensitivity was observed for the distal MBS.Regarding the lower bile duct,a better sensitivity was observed for the strictures in which an adequate space to open enough the biopsy forceps jaws was present.

ERCP is a diagnostic and therapeutic invasive imaging modality that provides an “indirect” radiological visualization of the biliopancreatic ductal system.ERCP with endobiliary brushing and/or forceps biopsy is often the first endoscopic approach for tissue sampling of biliary strictures because of its wide availability.According to several studies,the forceps biopsy sampling method has slightly better performance in comparison to brush cytology:A systematic review and a meta-analysis (9 studies;

=730 patients) by Navaneethan

[4] reported a pooled diagnostic odds ratio in detecting malignant biliary strictures of 43.18 (95% confidence interval [CI]),with a 48.1% pooled sensitivity and 99.2% pooled specificity,for intraductal biopsies,compared to a pooled diagnostic odds ratio of 33.43 (95%CI),with a 45% pooled sensitivity and 99% pooled specificity,for brushing.Combining the two sampling methods only modestly increased the sensitivity to 59.4%.

Percutaneous transhepatic endobiliary sampling of biliary strictures/obstructions is usually performed after local anaesthesia and during conscious sedation,under fluoroscopic guidance,through a biliary drainage access,before drainage positioning,both from the right or left liver lobe based on stricture/obstruction location,even though right intercostal approach is preferred for positional advantage and operator easiness.Periprocedural broad-spectrum antibiotic coverage is recommended.In cases of occurrence of hemobilia or cholangitis after percutaneous transhepatic biliary access,the sampling should be delayed 24-48 h[32,33].Cholangiography-guided detection of the stenosis/ obstruction is obtained and,after passing through the stricture with a guide-wire and positioning a 6-8F introducer sheath in the biliary ducts,the sampling procedure can be performed.

Peroral cholangioscopy

Various authors reported great diagnostic sensitivity of PTEFB in strictures of the upper biliary tree (up to 92%),whereas Ierardi

[56] reported lower sensitivity for lesions of the hilum and common bile duct as compared to the common hepatic bile duct and ampulla[33,35,42,54,55].Overall,the PTEFB procedure does not have severe technical difficulties,therefore the learning curve is reported to be steep,with only a few cases needed to master the technique[47].

But the frog when he had received this promise, put his head into the water and sank down, and in a short while came swimmming up again with the ball in his mouth, and threw it on the grass. The King s daughter was delighted to see her pretty plaything once more, and picked it up, and ran away with it. Wait, wait, said the frog. Take me with thee. I can t run as thou canst. But what did it avail him to scream his croak5, croak, after her, as loudly as he could? She did not listen to it, but ran home and soon forgot the poor frog, who was forced to go back into his well again.

A prospective multicentre study on indeterminate bile duct lesions and preoperative mucosal cancerous extension diagnosis by DOC plus NBI was conducted by Osanai

[15] in 2013.This work was conducted on a cohort of 87 patients of whom only 35 underwent endobiliary forceps biopsy sampling

DOC for indeterminate lesions.In 34/35 patients,NBI was useful in differentiating benign from malignant lesions.Collected data showed an accuracy rate of 85.7 % for indeterminate biliary lesion diagnosis using endobiliary forceps biopsy

DOC.That study also reported additional accuracy for detection of mucosal cancerous extension in the bile duct with POCS:In fact,the accuracy rate of ERCP alone in verifying the presence or absence of mucosal cancerous extension was 73.5%,in comparison to an accuracy rate of 92.9% for ERCP with POCS plus biopsy.However,as the authors acknowledged,that prospective study had the same bias concerning the non-randomized selection of patients and the fact that most of the targeted patients had already a bile duct cancer diagnosis:Those aspects could explain the high rate of accurate diagnosis of the study.A video endoscope and a disposable access catheter using fiberoptics (SpyGlass system;Boston Scientific,MA,United States) enable the SOC modality[16].

Since the launch of the first-generation SpyGlass system,in 2007,several studies have reported increasing sensitivity and accuracy with the addition of its direct endoscopic visualization of the bile duct to ERCP or tissue sampling [17-19].However,the mean sensitivity of biliary sampling,using the dedicated biopsy forceps (SpyByte),for discriminating between malignant and benign biliary lesions was only slightly superior (68%) to that of the other conventional sampling modalities (Figure 2).

The initial version of SpyGlass was fiberoptic and the optical probe was reusable.Since 2015,a new digital single-operator/single-use instrument (SpyGlass DS;Boston Scientific,MA,United States) has been available.This 2

generation system does not require to be reprocessed to avoid the issue of potential image degradation with repeated use.In 2016,a prospective multicenter study in Japan enrolled 148 patients with a collection of pancreaticobiliary diseases (124 with biliary disease).This work reported a SpyGlass targeted biopsy sensitivity of 81.4% and an accuracy of histologic diagnosis in indeterminate biliary strictures of 70.7%[20].

But then they would warm copper5 pennies on the stove, and hold the warm pennies against the frozen pane6; there would be very soon a little round hole through which they could peep, and the soft bright eyes of the little boy and girl would beam through the hole at each window as they looked at each other

Direct cholangioscopy employing is questionable because of the same safety issue related to the occurrence of rare but life-threatening adverse events such as stroke caused by leakage of air into the portal or hepatic venous system[21],biliary perforation,and slightly higher incidence of postprocedural cholangitis[22].

Intraductal ultrasound-guided biopsy

IDUS involves the insertion into the bile duct of a high-frequency ultrasound ultrathin probe,generally over a wire.It provides high-resolution images of the ductal wall and periductal tissues[23].Potentially,IDUS could be an important diagnostic tool in the evaluation of the indeterminate biliary strictures in whom is not possible to obtain a diagnosis despite previous evaluations.ERCP with IDUS examination,if performed by an expert endoscopist trained in both EUS and ERCP,helps to identify patients with a high suspicious of MBS[1] better than EUS does,particularly for lesions located at the hilum or mid-bile duct[23,24].Several studies[25-28] reported high diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of IDUS during ERCP in differentiating malignant from benign strictures.Since IDUS provides real-time,highresolution images of the bile duct wall and the adjacent structures[27],it is an ideal tool to use before biliary stenting.Unfortunately,this modality is not widely used because of the lack of ERCP operators who are also skilled in EUS.IDUS is also limited by the lack of a specific sampling modality.

Consequently,based on those aspects,two studies have investigated the performance of IDUSguided biopsy sampling[29,30].In these two works the ultrasonic probe is inserted into the bile duct over the wire after endoscopic sphincterotomy until IDUS recognize the suspected MBS.While maintaining the ultrasonic probe on the narrowest position to the stricture,a conventional biopsy forceps is inserted into the orifice of the papilla to the tip of the placed ultrasonic probe under fluoroscopic guidance.During the trans-papillary biopsy forceps sampling the scanning ultrasonic probe is keep at the nearest intraductal position.

Jong

[29] reported a higher sensitivity for cancer diagnosis of indeterminate biliary strictures (87% with IDUS-guided biopsy in comparison to 67% with fluoroscopically trans-papillary guided biopsy).

To overcome the difficulty of common bile duct cannulation that is related to the thickness and the hardness of the standard biopsy forceps,some novel biopsy forceps have been developed.In 2017,Inoue

[11] published a study about the diagnostic yield of controllable biopsy-forceps (C-BF) in MBS.C-BF (MTW Endoskopie,Wesel,Germany) allows the tip’s angle to be adjusted by up to 90°.In that study,110 patients with biliary strictures were retrospectively evaluated.A high technical success rate (99%) of biliary biopsies sampled was reported.

The accuracy of IDUS-guided trans-papillary biopsy for MBS is significantly higher than conventional trans-papillary biopsy (90.8%

76.9%) in cases with intraductal infiltrating lesions,which were the most common findings on IDUS (47.5%).There was no significant difference in cancer detection rate according to the location of the stricture,as well as any significant improvement of cancer detection rates was reported in cases with extrinsic compressed lesions.This study reported no significant procedure-related adverse events (only two mild cases of hemobilia after trans-papillary forceps biopsy).

However,to date,there are no dedicated accessories that combine IDUS and forceps biopsy,thus IDUS-guided trans-papillary forceps biopsy is more challenging than conventional sampling modalities for the risks of bile-duct trauma.New types of IDUS probes or accessories for IDUS-guided transpapillary forceps biopsy,as well as larger studies for validation,are expected.

It was a bushel of potatoes. They were nice potatoes, extra large and scrubbed white and clean. But still and all, they were only a bushel of potatoes that anybody could buy in the Old Market for a lot less than a dollar.

Interventional radiology techniques

In cases in which the endoscopic approach to biliary strictures has failed or is deemed difficult or impossible due to unfavourable anatomy (

in cases of surgical interventions as hepaticojejunostomy),their cyto-histological assessment can be performed with percutaneous transhepatic endobiliary brushing and/or forceps biopsy (PTEFB)[31].

O Peter, said he, what a sorrow you have caused us, both myself and your mother, by running off like this just as we had got you well educated! Get up, now, so that I can see you properly, and have a talk with you

The night air was freezing, but the goosebumps on the pastor’s skin weren’t caused by the weather. As calmly as he could, he told the man about the woman who had been to the church that very afternoon.

In cases of brushing,a flexible probe with a brush on an atraumatic tip is introduced through the sheath up to the stricture and then is pushed and pulled and rotated under fluoroscopic guidance multiple times[34].

In case of PTEFB,a careful and accurate forceps biopsy is performed advancing the forceps through the introducer sheath.Patel

[35] described a variant of this technique,the so-called “cross and push”,in which the introducer sheath is advanced on a guidewire into the stricture/obstruction and is used to push the biopsy forceps granting greater stability of the forceps and allowing to obtain a larger lesion sample.Multiple samples should be taken,if possible,to obtain greater true-positive rates[36].A bile sample after the brushing/biopsy (as much as 10 milliliters) should be always taken for bile cytology,as it demonstrated to have up to a 34% of sensitivity,which increases to 52% in case of multiple and seriate samplings[37,38].In the case of forceps biopsy,a transhepatic cholangiography should be always performed to evaluate contrast medium leak from the bioptic site.

Cyto-histologic diagnosis of the sample obtained with the biopsy must always be confirmed after the surgical excision or,in case of benign disease diagnosis or non-specific findings,after dimensional stability of the lesion at a close follow-up.Redo-sampling should be performed in cases of a negative histological result,particularly in patients with high suspicion of malignancy,and in cases in which the operator deemed the first histological specimen inadequate for evaluation,as the fibrotic and scirrhous tissue which associates to cholangiocarcinoma and pancreatic carcinoma,in addition to necrotic and inflammatory changes,can hinder a correct diagnosis,even though Rabinovitz

reported that biopsies repeated three or more times yielding only negative results should reduce the probability of malignancy to 0%;it is mandatory,however,to perform a strict imaging and laboratory follow-up in these patients.

Percutaneous transhepatic endobiliary brushing demonstrates sensitivity rates ranging from 26 to 67%,and low negative predictive values (around 12.5%).Noticeably,Xing

[39] reported a superior sensitivity value of 75% with greater sensitivity in cases of cholangiocarcinoma

other strictures (

＜0.05) while stricture location had no effect on brushing sensitivity[32,34,40-43].

Overall percutaneous biliary forceps biopsy sensitivity has been attested between 55.8 and 93.3%,with a higher sensitivity for cholangiocarcinoma (up to 94%)[33,35,40,41,44-47].Augustin

[44] performed PTEFB in 13 patients,with at least 3 samples of 1-2 mm per patient,and in 92.3% of cases the material was deemed sufficient for histological analysis;PTEFB had sensitivity and accuracy rates of 88.9% and 92.3% respectively.

Jung

[33] performed 130 PTEFB obtaining a 78.4% sensitivity rate.Park

[48] retrospectively reviewed 271 PTEFB,finding 77.2% of sensitivity and 78.9% of accuracy.Patel

[35] with their abovementioned “cross and push” technique performed in 52 patients obtained a sensitivity of 93.3%.Inchingolo

[47] prospectively performed 30 PTEFB in 29 patients,with the “cross and push” technique,obtaining a sensitivity rate of 91.67% and an accuracy rate of 92.59%.Boos

[40] described better sensitivity rates when forceps biopsy and brush cytology were combined in a tandem approach (55.8%

40.6% of forceps biopsy alone);while this procedure can be considered expensive when compared to the use of forceps biopsy alone,it is cost-effective when compared to performing two separate procedures in case of an initial negative histological sample;however randomized studies comparing the sensitivity of the two approaches (single and tandem) should be performed.The tandem approach must be distinguished from obtaining a smear from forceps biopsy for cytological analysis[41].

That study reported different performances of the biopsies performed with C-BF depending on the target site:Adequate samples were respectively obtained in 96% (22/23) of specimens from the intrapancreatic common bile ducts,92% (11/12) of those from the upper common bile ducts,80% (12/15) from the carrefour of the hepatic ducts,75% (9/12) from the right intrahepatic bile ducts,and 31% (5/16) from the left intrahepatic bile ducts.

Christmas toys torn from their wrapping,ribbons tangled8 in the treesand there upon the forest floorlay Santa Claus, and all could seethat he was hurt from the tragic9 crashbut just how bad no one would ask

Among percutaneous transhepatic biopsy approaches,Schechter

[55] reported the use of the Simpson atherectomy catheter,with a sensitivity of 79% but 11% of hemorrhages,high costs,and difficulties in passing through angled transhepatic tracts.

On the other hand,Rossi

[34] described the diagnostic yield of sampling the balloon surface in patients with strictures which needed bilioplasty,reporting a sensitivity of 87.5%.

Peroral cholangioscopy (POCS) modalities provide direct visualization of the biliary ductal system.Those procedures are important diagnostic tools in cases of suspect MBS in which other available invasive/non-invasive imaging modalities (

EUS,CT,MRI,and ERCP with transpapillary biopsy sampling) cannot provide a definitive diagnosis.Three different cholangioscopic techniques are currently available:The “mother-baby” dual-operator cholangioscopy (DOC),the “mother-baby” single-operator cholangioscopy (SOC),and the direct cholangioscopy[14].DOC is necessarily performed by two endoscopists with the use of a very slim endoscope passed through the working channel of a duodenoscope up to cannulating the common bile duct,usually over a guide-wire.POCS with optical image manipulation using narrow-band imaging (NBI) allows emphasizing the imaging of certain features of the bile duct tissue,such as mucosal structures and capillary vessels (

irregular and tortuous vessels,papillogranular or nodular elevated surface),enabling to target biopsy onto the suspect lesion.

In terms of safety,PTEFB yielded low rates of complications,the most common being transient hemobilia,postprocedural cholangitis,transient bile leakage,and less often,the formation of biloma in the bioptic site,which were promptly treated with percutaneous drainage[33,35,44,45,47].

Other complications were related to the percutaneous puncture and not to the sampling procedure itself,ranging from subcapsular biloma to hepatic hematoma to pseudoaneurysm formation[35,56].

The main limitation of PTEFB is linked to the diagnosis of extra-biliary neoplasms determining biliary obstruction and which have not infiltrated yet the biliary duct walls (

hepatic hilum lymph-nodal metastasis,tumor infiltration/compression),due to the limited tissue samples,determining falsenegative results both during surgical inspection or at follow-up[57].Among metastatic tumor-related extrinsic biliary compression,the prospective analysis from Estrella

[58] demonstrated that metastases from colorectal cancer more commonly present with intrabiliary growth when compared to other tumors (10.6

1.9%).Another limitation is represented by the intrinsic characteristics of the forceps,which can cause “crush” artifacts of the bioptic specimen,represented by the degradation of the specimen during the bioptic maneuver,that can hinder the diagnosis[35].

Discussion

The diagnostic approach (Table 1) and correct histologic identification of a biliary stricture can be a demanding issue,while first-line non-invasive diagnostic methods alone cannot confirm the diagnosis of MBS in most of the cases.Moreover,pathological diagnosis is mandatory for the decision on the therapeutic approach.Therefore,it is crucial to establish the optimal sampling modality to confirm the diagnosis.According to current literature,both PTC and ERCP forceps biopsy are sensitive and accurate sampling modalities for suspected MBS.

30. Little man was sorry for her: Here is one of the few actions which might engender sympathy for Rumpelstiltskin. In some modern interpretations of the tale, the Rumpelstiltskin character is in love with the daughter/queen. Sometimes he is even the child s father. In Donna Jo Napoli s Spinners, the little man is the queen s father and the baby s grandfather.

Chang

[45] retrospectively compared a group of 38 patients undergoing PTEFB and brushing with a group of patients undergoing endoscopic trans-papillary biopsy;PTEFB had a sensitivity of 86.7% compared to the 77.1% of endoscopic biopsy,especially for biliary strictures located at the hilum.Mohkam

[46] retrospectively compared 75 PTEFB with patients who underwent endoscopic transpapillary biopsy and PTEFB demonstrated sensitivity rate of 69%,similar to endoscopic biopsy (75%,

=0.45).The choice of biliary strictures that more suitable for endoscopic rather than a percutaneous biopsy seems to mainly depend on the anatomical location and type of stricture.

Several studies[45,54] demonstrated that PTEFB is correlated with high diagnostic sensitivity for strictures located in the upper biliary tree,distant from the papilla - where endoscopic biopsy has better sensitivity.Particularly,Chang

[45],reported higher sensitivity for PTEFB in hilum lesions than those located within the common bile duct.According to the authors,sensitivity was higher for strictures located close to the hilum.On the contrary,compared to PTC,ERCP resulted in higher accuracy for lower strictures.In this setting,the distance between the site of biliary stricture and the device used to push and maneuver the biopsy forceps seems to play a key role:the greater the distance,the lesser the precision of sampling.Therefore,specimen sampling of the biliary strictures located proximal to the hilum should ideally be performed

PTEFB,while for strictures located at the hilum or more distally,ERCP should be preferred.Other factors influencing the effectiveness of endobiliary biopsy are insufficient space for forceps opening noted in cases of severe strictures,lesions located at sites with marked angulation,lesion shape,and of course local expertise,and device availability.

CONCLUSION

Both ERCP and PTC endobiliary biopsy remain valid methods for tissue identification demonstrating satisfactory diagnostic accuracy,especially in properly selected lesions.Novel slim biopsy forceps and new endobiliary sampling modalities such as POCS,and IDUS-guided biopsy,currently under investigation,seem to improve the efficacy of histologic characterization.

For Kate Saenko, who has been involved in computer vision since the early 2000s, those changes are very tangible. Computer vision is a field of artificial intelligence that enables computers to process and understand the context and content of digital images and videos. It is the technology used in a wide range of fields, including image classification, facial recognition, and the automateddiagnosis of MRI and X-ray images. It's one of the fields where rules-based programming has historically struggled, because the number of rules developers have to write down are virtually endless.

All authors equally contributed to this paper with conception and design of the study,literature review and analysis,drafting,critical revision,and editing of the manuscript,and final approval of the final version.

All the authors are aware of the content of the manuscript and have no conflict of interest.

This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers.It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BYNC 4.0) license,which permits others to distribute,remix,adapt,build upon this work non-commercially,and license their derivative works on different terms,provided the original work is properly cited and the use is noncommercial.See:https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/

Italy

From somewhere among the throng31（） in the street or else out of the thin stream of pedestrians32（） a young woman tripped and stood by the cab. The professional hawk’s eye of Jerry caught the movement. He made a lurch33（，） for the cab, overturning three or four onlookers34 and himself—no! he caught the cap of a water-plug and kept his feet. Like a sailor shinning up the ratlins（） during a squall（） , Jerry mounted to his professional seat. Once he was there McGary’s liquids were baffled. He see-sawed on the mizzen-mast of his craft as safe as a steeplejack（） rigged to the flagpole of a sky-scraper.

Riccardo Inchingolo 0000-0002-0253-5936;Fabrizio Acquafredda 0000-0002-8601-7537;Alessandro Posa 0000-0001-9617-3413;Thiago Franchi Nunes 0000-0003-0006-3725;Stavros Spiliopoulos 0000-0003-1860-0568;Francesco Panzera 0000-0001-5401-2152;Carlos Alberto Praticò 0000-0003-4779-3450.

Ma YJ

The next day he went out to hunt, and when he came home the first thing he did was to go up to the doll and brush off some of the ashes from the fire which had fallen on its face

Wang TQ

Ma YJ

1 Singh A,Gelrud A,Agarwal B.Biliary strictures:diagnostic considerations and approach.

2015;3:22-31 [PMID:25355800 DOI:10.1093/gastro/gou072]

2 Gerhards MF,Vos P,van Gulik TM,Rauws EA,Bosma A,Gouma DJ.Incidence of benign lesions in patients resected for suspicious hilar obstruction.

2001;88:48-51 [PMID:11136309 DOI:10.1046/j.1365-2168.2001.01607.x]

3 Hewitt MJ,McPhail MJ,Possamai L,Dhar A,Vlavianos P,Monahan KJ.EUS-guided FNA for diagnosis of solid pancreatic neoplasms:a meta-analysis.

2012;75:319-331 [PMID:22248600 DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2011.08.049]

4 Navaneethan U,Njei B,Lourdusamy V,Konjeti R,Vargo JJ,Parsi MA.Comparative effectiveness of biliary brush cytology and intraductal biopsy for detection of malignant biliary strictures:a systematic review and meta-analysis.

2015;81:168-176 [PMID:25440678 DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2014.09.017]

5 Kimura H,Matsubayashi H,Sasaki K,Ito H,Hirosawa K,Uesaka K,Kanemoto H,Ono H.Factors affecting the yield of endoscopic transpapillary bile duct biopsy for the diagnosis of pancreatic head cancer.

2013;13:524-529 [PMID:24075518 DOI:10.1016/j.pan.2013.08.005]

6 Korc P,Sherman S.ERCP tissue sampling.

2016;84:557-571 [PMID:27156656 DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2016.04.039]

7 Sugiyama M,Atomi Y,Wada N,Kuroda A,Muto T.Endoscopic transpapillary bile duct biopsy without sphincterotomy for diagnosing biliary strictures:a prospective comparative study with bile and brush cytology.

1996;91:465-467 [PMID:8633492]

8 Schoefl R,Haefner M,Wrba F,Pfeffel F,Stain C,Poetzi R,Gangl A.Forceps biopsy and brush cytology during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for the diagnosis of biliary stenoses.

1997;32:363-368 [PMID:9140159 DOI:10.3109/00365529709007685]

9 Wright ER,Bakis G,Srinivasan R,Raju R,Vittal H,Sanders MK,Bernadino K,Stefan A,Blaszyk H,Howell DA.Intraprocedural tissue diagnosis during ERCP employing a new cytology preparation of forceps biopsy (Smash protocol).

2011;106:294-299 [PMID:21102569 DOI:10.1038/ajg.2010.447]

10 Adhya AK,Mohanty R.Utility of touch imprint cytology in the preoperative diagnosis of malignancy in low resource setting.Diagn Cytopathol.2017 Jun;45(6):507-512.[PMID:28267274 DOI:10.1002/dc.23699

11 Inoue T,Kitano R,Kobayashi Y,Ishii N,Sakamoto K,Ohashi T,Nakade Y,Sumida Y,Ito K,Nakao H,Yoneda M.Assessing the diagnostic yield of controllable biopsy-forceps for biliary strictures.

2018;53:598-603 [PMID:29183203 DOI:10.1080/00365521.2017.1409799]

12 Yamamoto K,Tsuchiya T,Itoi T,Tsuji S,Tanaka R,Tonozuka R,Honjo M,Mukai S,Kamada K,Fujita M,Asai Y,Matsunami Y,Nagakawa Y,Yamaguchi H,Sofuni A.Evaluation of novel slim biopsy forceps for diagnosis of biliary strictures:Single-institutional study of consecutive 360 cases (with video).

2017;23:6429-6436 [PMID:29085192 DOI:10.3748/wjg.v23.i35.6429]

13 Kwon CI,Kim TH,Kim KA.Guide-Wire Assisted Endobiliary Forceps Biopsy Sampling.

2017;50:404-405 [PMID:28190328 DOI:10.5946/ce.2016.149]

14 Tringali A,Lemmers A,Meves V,Terheggen G,Pohl J,Manfredi G,H?fner M,Costamagna G,Devière J,Neuhaus H,Caillol F,Giovannini M,Hassan C,Dumonceau JM.Intraductal biliopancreatic imaging:European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) technology review.

2015;47:739-753 [PMID:26147492 DOI:10.1055/s-0034-1392584]

15 Osanai M,Itoi T,Igarashi Y,Tanaka K,Kida M,Maguchi H,Yasuda K,Okano N,Imaizumi H,Itokawa F.Peroral video cholangioscopy to evaluate indeterminate bile duct lesions and preoperative mucosal cancerous extension:a prospective multicenter study.

2013;45:635-642 [PMID:23807803 DOI:10.1055/s-0032-1326631]

16 Igarashi Y,Ukita T,Inoue H,Ishiguro J,Ogawa S,Satou M,Maetani I,Sakai Y.Clinical evaluation of the peroral cholangioscopy using a new videoscope.

1999;5:231-237 [PMID:18493506 DOI:10.1155/DTE.5.231]

17 Lenze F,Bokemeyer A,Gross D,Nowacki T,Bettenworth D,Ullerich H.Safety,diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic efficacy of digital single-operator cholangioscopy.

6 (6):902-909.[PMID:30023068 DOI:10.1177/2050640618764943]

18 Ogura T,Imanishi M,Kurisu Y,Onda S,Sano T,Takagi W,Okuda A,Miyano A,Amano M,Nishioka N,Yamada T,Masuda D,Takenaka M,Kitano M,Higuchi K.Prospective evaluation of digital single-operator cholangioscope for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures (with videos).

29 (7):782-789.[PMID:28349613 DOI:10.1111/den.12878]

19 Karagyozov P,Boeva I,Tishkov I.Role of digital single-operator cholangioscopy in the diagnosis and treatment of biliary disorders.

11(1):31-40.[PMID:30705730 DOI:10.4253/wjge.v11.i1.31]

20 Kurihara T,Yasuda I,Isayama H,Tsuyuguchi T,Yamaguchi T,Kawabe K,Okabe Y,Hanada K,Hayashi T,Ohtsuka T,Oana S,Kawakami H,Igarashi Y,Matsumoto K,Tamada K,Ryozawa S,Kawashima H,Okamoto Y,Maetani I,Inoue H,Itoi T.Diagnostic and therapeutic single-operator cholangiopancreatoscopy in biliopancreatic diseases:Prospective multicenter study in Japan.

22:1891-1901 [PMID:26855549 DOI:10.3748/wjg.v22.i5.1891]

21 Finsterer J,St?llberger C,Bastovansky A.Cardiac and cerebral air embolism from endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

2010;22:1157-1162 [PMID:20555267 DOI:10.1097/MEG.0b013e32833c5459]

22 Ogura T,Takagi W,Kurisu Y,Higuchi K.Technical tips for peroral transluminal cholangioscopy using novel singleoperator cholangioscope (with videos).

23:E25-E29 [PMID:27531563 DOI:10.1002/jhbp.380]

23 Tamada K,Tomiyama T,Wada S,Ohashi A,Satoh Y,Ido K,Sugano K.Endoscopic transpapillary bile duct biopsy with the combination of intraductal ultrasonography in the diagnosis of biliary strictures.

50:326-331 [PMID:11839709 DOI:10.1136/gut.50.3.326]

24 Frossard JL,Dumonceau JM.The Role of EUS in the Biliary System.In:Shami VM,Kahaleh M (eds) Endoscopic Ultrasound.

2010;Humana Press,Totowa,NJ

25 Heinzow HS,Kammerer S,Rammes C,Wessling J,Domagk D,Meister T.Comparative analysis of ERCP,IDUS,EUS and CT in predicting malignant bile duct strictures.

2014;20:10495-10503 [PMID:25132767 DOI:10.3748/wjg.v20.i30.10495]

26 Domagk D,Wessling J,Reimer P,Hertel L,Poremba C,Senninger N,Heinecke A,Domschke W,Menzel J.Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography,intraductal ultrasonography,and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography in bile duct strictures:a prospective comparison of imaging diagnostics with histopathological correlation.

2004;99:1684-1689 [PMID:15330902 DOI:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2004.30347.x]

27 Domagk D,Poremba C,Dietl KH,Senninger N,Heinecke A,Domschke W,Menzel J.Endoscopic transpapillary biopsies and intraductal ultrasonography in the diagnostics of bile duct strictures:a prospective study Gut 2002;51(2):240-244 [PMID:12117887 DOI:10.1136/gut.51.2.240]

28 Menzel J,Poremba C,Dietl KH,Domschke W.Preoperative diagnosis of bile duct strictures--comparison of intraductal ultrasonography with conventional endosonography.

2000;35:77-82 [PMID:10672839 DOI:10.1080/003655200750024579]

29 Jong HM.The usefulness of IDUS-guided trans-papillary bile duct biopsy for the diagnosis of malignant biliary strictures.

2011;43-A53 [DOI:10.1055/s-0031-1292124]

30 Kim HS,Moon JH,Lee YN,Choi HJ,Lee HW,Kim HK,Lee TH,Choi MH,Cha SW,Cho YD,Park SH.Prospective Comparison of Intraductal Ultrasonography-Guided Transpapillary Biopsy and Conventional Biopsy on Fluoroscopy in Suspected Malignant Biliary Strictures.

2018;12:463-470 [PMID:29409305 DOI:10.5009/gnl17205]

31 Elyaderani MK,Gabriele OF.Brush and forceps biopsy of biliary ducts

percutaneous transhepatic catheterization.

1980;135:777-778 [PMID:7384474 DOI:10.1148/radiology.135.3.7384474]

32 Savader SJ,Prescott CA,Lund GB,Osterman FA.Intraductal biliary biopsy:comparison of three techniques.

1996;7:743-750 [PMID:8897345 DOI:10.1016/s1051-0443(96)70843-6]

33 Jung GS,Huh JD,Lee SU,Han BH,Chang HK,Cho YD.Bile duct:analysis of percutaneous transluminal forceps biopsy in 130 patients suspected of having malignant biliary obstruction.

2002;224:725-730 [PMID:12202706 DOI:10.1148/radiol.2242011501]

34 Rossi M,Cantisani V,Salvatori FM,Rebonato A,Greco L,Giglio L,Guido G,Pagliara E,David V.Histologic assessment of biliary obstruction with different percutaneous endoluminal techniques.

2004;4:3 [PMID:15329152 DOI:10.1186/1471-2342-4-3]

35 Patel P,Rangarajan B,Mangat K.Improved Accuracy of Percutaneous Biopsy Using "Cross and Push" Technique for Patients Suspected with Malignant Biliary Strictures.

2015;38:1005-1010 [PMID:25192948 DOI:10.1007/s00270-014-0976-0]

36 Rabinovitz M,Zajko AB,Hassanein T,Shetty B,Bron KM,Schade RR,Gavaler JS,Block G,Van Thiel DH,Dekker A.Diagnostic value of brush cytology in the diagnosis of bile duct carcinoma:a study in 65 patients with bile duct strictures.

1990;12:747-752 [PMID:2210678 DOI:10.1002/hep.1840120421]

37 Muro A,Mueller PR,Ferrucci JT Jr,Taft PD.Bile cytology.A routine addition to percutaneous biliary drainage.

1983;149:846-847 [PMID:6647860 DOI:10.1148/radiology.149.3.6647860]

38 Tsuchiya T,Yokoyama Y,Ebata T,Igami T,Sugawara G,Kato K,Shimoyama Y,Nagino M.Randomized controlled trial on timing and number of sampling for bile aspiration cytology.

2014;21:433-438 [PMID:24353113 DOI:10.1002/jhbp.61]

39 Xing GS,Geng JC,Han XW,Dai JH,Wu CY.Endobiliary brush cytology during percutaneous transhepatic cholangiodrainage in patients with obstructive jaundice.

2005;4:98-103 [PMID:15730930]

40 Boos J,Yoo RJ,Steinkeler J,Ayata G,Ahmed M,Sarwar A,Weinstein J,Faintuch S,Brook OR.Fluoroscopic percutaneous brush cytology,forceps biopsy and both in tandem for diagnosis of malignant biliary obstruction.

2018;28:522-529 [PMID:28779396 DOI:10.1007/s00330-017-4987-5]

41 Tapping CR,Byass OR,Cast JE.Cytological sampling versus forceps biopsy during percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and analysis of factors predicting success.

2012;35:883-889 [PMID:21647806 DOI:10.1007/s00270-011-0193-z]

42 Rossi M,Lemos A,Bonaiuti P,Amoruso M,Petrone A,Petrozza V,Benvenuto A,Rossi P.[Instrumental diagnosis of obstructive jaundice:brushing versus biopsy].

1997;93:230-235 [PMID:9221415]

43 Mendez G Jr,Russell E,Levi JU,Koolpe H,Cohen M.Percutaneous brush biopsy and internal drainage of biliary tree through endoprosthesis.

1980;134:653-659 [PMID:6767347 DOI:10.2214/ajr.134.4.653]

44 Augustin AM,Steingrüber M,Fluck F,Goetze O,Bley TA,Kickuth R.Percutaneous endobiliary forceps biopsy of biliary strictures for histopathologic examination.

2020;26:339-344 [PMID:32558649 DOI:10.5152/dir.2020.19329]

45 Chang HY,Liu B,Wang YZ,Wang WJ,Wang W,Li D,Li YL.Percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography versus endoscopic retrograde cholangiography for the pathological diagnosis of suspected malignant bile duct strictures.

2020;99:e19545 [PMID:32176109 DOI:10.1097/MD.0000000000019545]

46 Mohkam K,Malik Y,Derosas C,Isaac J,Marudanayagam R,Mehrzad H,Mirza DF,Muiesan P,Roberts KJ,Sutcliffe RP.Percutaneous transhepatic cholangiographic endobiliary forceps biopsy versus endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration for proximal biliary strictures:a single-centre experience.

2017;19:530-537 [PMID:28302441 DOI:10.1016/j.hpb.2017.02.001]

47 Inchingolo R,Spiliopoulos S,Nestola M,Nardella M.Outcomes of percutaneous transluminal biopsy of biliary lesions using a dedicated forceps system.

2019;60:602-607 [PMID:30111195 DOI:10.1177/0284185118795319]

48 Park JG,Jung GS,Yun JH,Yun BC,Lee SU,Han BH,Ko JH.Percutaneous transluminal forceps biopsy in patients suspected of having malignant biliary obstruction:factors influencing the outcomes of 271 patients.

2017;27:4291-4297 [PMID:28349279 DOI:10.1007/s00330-017-4796-x]

49 Colombi D,Aragona G,Bodini FC,Zangrandi A,Morelli N,Michieletti E.SpyGlass percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopy-guided diagnosis of adenocarcinoma of the ampullary region in a patient with bariatric biliopancreatic diversion.

2019;18:291-293 [PMID:30879891 DOI:10.1016/j.hbpd.2019.03.002]

50 Jung JY,Lee SK,Oh HC,Lee TY,Kwon SH,Lee SS,Seo DW,Kim MH.The role of percutaneous transhepatic cholangioscopy in patients with hilar strictures.

2007;1:56-62 [PMID:20485659 DOI:10.5009/gnl.2007.1.1.56]

51 Ahmed S,Schlachter TR,Hong K.Percutaneous Transhepatic Cholangioscopy.

2015;18:201-209 [PMID:26615160 DOI:10.1053/j.tvir.2015.07.003]

52 Darcy M,Picus D.Cholangioscopy.

2008;11:133-142 [PMID:18922458 DOI:10.1053/j.tvir.2008.07.007]

53 Schechter MS,Doemeny JM,Johnson JO.Biliary ductal shave biopsy with use of the Simpson atherectomy catheter.

1993;4:819-824 [PMID:8281007 DOI:10.1016/s1051-0443(93)71981-8]

54 Fohlen A,Bazille C,Menahem B,Jegonday MA,Dupont B,Le Pennec V,Lubrano J,Guiu B,Pelage JP.Transhepatic forceps biopsy combined with biliary drainage in obstructive jaundice:safety and accuracy.

2019;29:2426-2435 [PMID:30511177 DOI:10.1007/s00330-018-5852-x]

55 Eloubeidi MA,Chen VK,Jhala NC,Eltoum IE,Jhala D,Chhieng DC,Syed SA,Vickers SM,Mel Wilcox C.Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy of suspected cholangiocarcinoma.

2004;2:209-213 [PMID:15017604 DOI:10.1016/s1542-3565(04)00005-9]

56 Ierardi AM,Mangini M,Fontana F,Floridi C,De Marchi G,Petrillo M,Capasso R,Chini C,Cocozza E,Cuffari S,Segato S,Rotondo A,Carrafiello G.Usefulness and safety of biliary percutaneous transluminal forceps biopsy (PTFB):our experience.

2014;23:96-101 [PMID:24328985 DOI:10.3109/13645706.2013.854807]

57 Inchingolo R,Nestola M,Nunes TF,Spiliopoulos S,Nardella M.Biliary involvement in liver metastases:long-term experience with biliary biopsy from a single center.

2021;54:15-20 [PMID:33574628 DOI:10.1590/0100-3984.2020.0004]

58 Estrella JS,Othman ML,Taggart MW,Hamilton SR,Curley SA,Rashid A,Abraham SC.Intrabiliary growth of liver metastases:clinicopathologic features,prevalence,and outcome.

2013;37:1571-1579 [PMID:23797727 DOI:10.1097/PAS.0b013e318293ddf1]