throbber
New Methods & IV aterials
`
`Endoscopic retrograde wire-guided cytol
`ogy of malignant biliary strictures using
`a novel scraping brush
`
`Vinod K. Parasher, MD
`Kees Huibregtse, MD, PhD
`
`Background: Tissue sampling to differentiate
`benign from malignant pancreatobiliary strictures
`remains problematic despite the availability of sev
`eral new sampling methods. A new device is
`described which attempts to correct some of the
`drawbacks.
`Methods: The device consists of a 10F dilator
`which has an attached pad of Velcro. The Velcro
`has semi-rigid, mushroom-shaped bristles. A cyto
`logic sample is obtained by the abrasive action of
`the brush when it is passed through the stricture.
`Fifteen patients with obstructive jaundice under
`went brushing of the bile duct using this device.
`Results: Cytologic samples obtained with this
`device were positive for malignancy in all 15
`patients. Diagnostic confirmation was obtained by
`assessment of clinical course, radiologic findings,
`and during surgery.
`Conclusion: Preliminary experience indicates that
`this new device enhances the yield of tissue sam
`pling from malignant bile duct strictures.
`
`Tissue sampling to differentiate benign from
`malignant pancreatobiliary strictures remains
`imperfect despite recent advances in instrumenta
`tion and techniques. Single sampling techniques
`used during ERCP are associated with relatively
`low and varying yields ranging from 37% to 71%. 1"5
`A combination of different techniques, however,
`improves the overall sensitivity.
`
`Received July 23, 1997. For revision January 13, 1998. Accepted
`April 24, 1998.
`
`From the Department of Medicine, Beebe Medical Center, Lewes,
`Delaware; and the Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The
`Netherlands.
`
`Presented in part at the annual meeting of the American Society
`of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, May 1996, San Francisco,
`California (Gastrointestinal Endoscopy 1996:43:300).
`
`Reprint requests: Vinod K. Parasher, MD, Director of Endoscopy,
`Beebe Medical Center, 424 Savannah Road, Lewes, DE 19958.
`
`Copyright © 1998 by the American Society for Gastrointestinal
`Endoscopy
`
`0016-5107/98/S5.00 + 0 37/69/91389
`
`-- _ - -
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`,
`
`The factors responsible for these inconsistent
`results include the extrinsic nature of the malig
`nancy, submucosal penetration of the tumor without
`involvement of the ductal epithelium, inaccessibility
`of the lesion because of accompanying fibrosis, and
`the scirrhous nature of the tumor. However, the
`yield of cytology increases when the ductal epitheli
`um is breached. Subsequently, the tumor becomes
`more accessible as observed during the application
`of sampling techniques, such as fine-needle aspira
`tion, forceps biopsy, and dilation of the strictures
`before brushings.
`Although present cytology brushes breach the
`epithelium to some extent, the soft nature of the
`bristles and the absence of adequate radial force
`directing the bristles into the epithelium reduce the
`frequency of a positive result. Variations in brush
`design such as differences in length and width of the
`bristles may also contribute to suboptimal acquisi
`tion of specimens. Conceivably,
`if a stricture is
`scraped by an abrasive device whose diameter is
`greater than the diameter of the stricture, sufficient
`accessibility, mucosal penetration, and disruption of
`the ductal epithelium could be achieved; and, if so,
`yields would be enhanced. Indeed, scraping by stent
`"flaps"8'9 and more recently by means of Soehendra
`stent retrievers10 seems to achieve some of the
`desired results. In this article we describe our expe
`rience with a new device that is used as a scrap
`ing/abrasive brush to obtain cytology from biliary
`strictures.
`
`METHODS
`
`The device consists of a 10F tapered dilator. In close
`proximity to the dilator is a 1 cm pad of Velcro consisting
`of specially designed semi-rigid, mushroom-ended bristles
`that are glued with a nontoxic adhesive and mounted over
`a 200 cm 4F inner catheter (Fig. 1). The assembly (except
`the dilator) is housed in a 7F Teflon outer sheath that pro
`tects the acquired cellular material (Fig. 2). Radiopaque
`markers are provided proximal and distal to the pad and
`also on the outer Teflon sheath to enhance fluoroscopic
`visualization.
`When initiating the procedure the device is passed over
`a previously placed 0.035-inch guidewire. The stricture is
`dilated by gently pushing the 10F dilator through it. The
`brushings and scrapings are then taken by deploying the
`device through the stricture and then pulling it into the
`outer sheath which is placed at the lower end of the stric
`ture. Multiple maneuvers are carried out to enhance
`acquisition of cytologic material. A sphincterotomy is not
`required to accomplish this procedure. After completion of
`the procedure, the brush is retrieved over the guidewire.
`The short end of the device (including the sheath) is cut,
`and the contents are expressed into a centrifuge tube that
`is suspended with cytology transport media. The brush
`and sheath are spun using a vortex agitator to dislodge
`
`288 GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY
`
`VOLUME 48, NO. 3, 1998
`
`EXHIBIT 1004
`
`

`
`ERCP wire-guided cytology with novel scraping brush
`
`V Parasher, K Huibregtse
`
`i
`
`Figure 1. Scraping brush consisting of 10F tapered dilator
`{small arrow) and Velcro pad with the radiopaque markers
`located proximal and distal to it (arrowhead).
`
`Figure 2. Nondeployed scraping brush housed in 7F outer
`Teflon sheath ( large arrow).
`
`the cellular material. The fluid is processed with cytospin,
`and slides can be made for appropriate staining. Manual
`disengagement of the material from the Velcro brush is
`also performed by using a needle, and the materials are
`used for cell block. Velcro, by virtue of its intrinsic proper
`ty of adherence, gathers a large quantity of cellular mate
`rial. No loss of cellular material occurs during the process
`of withdrawal because the brush fits snugly into the outer
`sheath and no movement of the brush takes place in the
`outer sheath because its diameter (7F) is less than that of
`the brush (9F).
`
`Patients
`
`Fifteen patients aged 55 to 78 years (mean age 68.3
`years, 3 men and 12 women) who were referred for evalu
`ation of obstructive jaundice participated in the study.
`Informed consent was obtained from all participants.
`Brushings were taken by means of
`the previously
`described technique in a nonconsecutive fashion.
`Confirmation of the diagnosis was obtained by assess
`ment of the clinical course, invasive radiology, or surgery.
`
`In four patients brushings were additionally taken using
`the Geenen cytology brush (Wilson-Cook Medical, Inc.,
`Winston-Salem, N.C.) before using the new device. No
`patients underwent dilation before the passage of the new
`device. In addition, none of the patients had prior stents
`or had undergone previous attempts at endoscopic sam
`pling. The device was deployed only in the bile duct.
`
`RESULTS
`
`Cytology was positive in all patients. There were
`1 1 cases of pancreatic carcinoma, 2 of cholangiocar-
`cinoma, 1 of Klatskin tumor, and 1 case of metasta
`tic disease. When the cytology material obtained
`from the Geenen brush and our scraping brush was
`compared, the amount of cellular material obtained
`with this new device was at
`least
`twice that
`obtained with the current standard brush. This com
`parison was made by manually counting the cellular
`material. Some degree of cell injury was noted as the
`
`VOLUME 48. NO. 3, 1998
`
`GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY 289
`
`

`
`V Parasher, K Huibregtse
`
`ERCP wire-guided cytology with novel scraping brush
`
`result of the abrasion. However, this did not impair
`the ability to make a definitive diagnosis. No brush-
`or procedure-related complications occurred. No
`patients with positive cytology were later shown to
`have a benign stricture.
`
`DISCUSSION
`
`A definitive histologic diagnosis of pancreatobil-
`iary strictures is crucial in the diagnosis and man
`agement of patients who present with malignant
`obstructive jaundice. This is important for patient
`prognosis and peace of mind inasmuch as the clini
`cal presentation by itself can be confusing. In two
`studies, 10% of hilar tumors were shown to be
`benign even though the preoperative diagnosis was
`malignancy.12'13 Several modalities have been used
`for tissue acquisition. Brush cytology is popular and
`has a sensitivity that varies from 35% to 70%.1-6 A
`review of 6 studies of brush cytology found a sensi
`tivity of 59% and specificity of 99%.3 The yield of
`brush cytology is variable, and a relatively poor
`yield may be due in part to the scanty nature of the
`specimen coupled with the extrinsic/desmoplastic
`nature of the tumor. Furthermore, the soft bristles of
`currently available brushes may not penetrate deep
`enough (or breach the ductal epithelium sufficient
`ly) to gain access into the tumor. Perforation may
`also occur.4
`Forcep biopsies can obtain deeper tissue speci
`mens; the sensitivity varies from 14% to 71%.6'7
`However, this requires sphincterotomy and is tech
`nically difficult. Complications such as perforation
`may occur.5 Needle biopsies can also reach deeper
`tissue layers and are reported to have yields of 37%
`to 62%.5'6 Combinations of the above methods are
`superior to single methods.4"7 One large prospective
`study involving 233 consecutive patients found a
`sensitivity for brush cytology of 35% and 43% for
`biopsy. When combined, the sensitivity was 63% and
`specificity 97%. 5
`We have described a new device which, by virtue
`of its design, corrects some of the drawbacks of cur
`rently used conventional brushing devices. The fea
`tures of this scraping brush that may result in high
`er yields from malignant biliary strictures include
`the following: (1) The 10F tapered dilator dilates the
`stricture and causes disruption of the mucosa; dila
`tion of the stricture before obtaining the cytology
`specimen has been shown to increase yield.11 (2) The
`9F diameter of the actual brush may allow a snug fit
`within the stricture thus generating sufficient radi
`al penetrating force during movement of the brush
`to further disrupt
`the ductal epithelium.
`(3)
`Scraping with this device is achieved by the special
`ly designed Velcro pad, which is abrasive. Because
`
`the bristles are semi-rigid and rough (when com
`pared with the relatively flexible and soft pliable
`bristles of a standard brush) and tightly woven into
`a fabric, this combination of characteristics could
`have
`generated
`additional
`scraping
`force.
`Furthermore, because of the intrinsic adhesive
`nature of the Velcro, significant amounts of cellular
`material become attached to its surface. This pro
`vides greater numbers of cells which are not easily
`dislodged. The combination of these features may
`have contributed to the improved results obtained
`with the use of this device. Prospective studies are
`needed to compare the use of this device with other
`existing methods.
`
`REFERENCES
`
`!. Venu EP, Gecnen JE, Kini M, Hogan W, Payne M, Johnson
`GK, et al. Endoscopic retrograde brush cytology. A new tech
`nique. Gastroenterology 1990;99:1475-9.
`2. Foutch PG, Kerr DM, Harlan JR, Kummet TD. A prospective
`controlled analysis of endoscopic cytotechniques for diagnos
`tic of malignant biliary strictures. Am J Gastroenterol
`1991;86:577-80.
`3. Kurzawinski T, Deery A, Davidson BR. Diagnostic value of
`cytology for biliary stricture. Br J Surg 1993;80:414-21.
`4. Ponchon T, Gagnon P, Berger F, Labadie M, Liaras A,
`Chavaillon A, et al. Value of endobiliary brush cytology and
`biopsies for the diagnosis of malignant bile duct stenosis:
`result of a prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc 1995;42:
`565-72.
`5. Pugliese V, Conio M, Nicolo G, Saccomanno S, Gatteschi B.
`Endoscopic retrograde forceps biopsy and brush cytology of
`biliary strictures: a prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc
`1995;42:520-6.
`6. Howell DA, Parsons WG, Jones MA, Bosco JJ, Hanson BL.
`Complete tissue sampling of biliary strictures at ERCP using
`a new device. Gastrointest Endosc 1996;43:498-502.
`7. Sherman S, Esher EJ, Pezzi JS, Rupp TH, Gottlieb K,
`Ikenberry SO, et al. Yield of ERCP tissue sampling of biliary
`strictures by brush, forceps and needle aspiration methods
`[abstract]. Gastrointest Endosc 1995;42:415.
`8. Leung JWC, Sung JY, Chung SCS, Chan KM. Endoscopic
`scraping biopsy of malignant biliary strictures [letter].
`Gastrointest Endosc 1989;35:65.
`9. Yip CK, Leung JWC, Chan KM, Metrewell C. Scrape biopsy of
`malignant biliary stricture through percutaneous transhep
`atic biliary drainage tracts. Am J Roentgenol 1989;
`152:529-30.
`10. Van Someran RNM, Benson MJ, Glynn MJ, Ashraf W, Swain
`CP. A novel technique for dilating difficult malignant biliary
`strictures during ERCP. Gastrointest Endosc 1996;43:495-8.
`11. Mohandas KM, Swaroop VS, Gullar SU, Dave UR, Jaganath
`P, Desouza LJ. Diagnosis of malignant obstructive jaundice by
`bile cytology: results improved by dilating the bile duct stric
`tures. Gastrointest Endosc 1994;40:150-4.
`12. Hadjis NS, Collier NA, Blumgart LH. Malignant masquerade
`at the hilum of the liver. Br J Surg 1985;72:659-61.
`13. Verbeek PCM, van Leeuwen DJ, de Wit T, Reeders JWAJ,
`Smits NJ, Bosma A, et al. Benign fibrosing disease at the
`hepatic confluence mimicking klatskin tumours. Surgery
`
`1992;112:866-71.
`
`290 GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY
`
`VOLUME 48, NO. 3, 1998

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket