The armamentarium of 'Endo-hepatology' is proliferating with the advancements in techniques and availability of new devices in the field of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). This has resulted in the merger of multitude of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions, such as EUS-liver biopsy (LB), EUS-angioembolization of gastric varices, EUS-portal pressure gradient (PPG) measurement, and others into a 'one-stop-shop' for efficient patient management. Lack of standardization of these techniques forms a major hinderance in their widespread adoption.

A comprehensive literature search was undertaken across various databases on EUS-LB and EUS-PPG till November 2024 for reviews, observational studies, and randomized trials on EUS-LB and EUS-PPG, describing its indications, technique, and data of safety and efficacy, detailing its role in day-to-day clinical practice.

EUS-LB and EUS-PPG have shown promise in the ever-growing field of endo-hepatology. EUS-LB has exhibited excellent safety profile and comparable tissue yield compared to its percutaneous counterpart. On the other hand, EUS-PPG seems to be a viable alternative although it needs to be standardized further. From a patient and hospital perspective, they might prove to be convenient and cost-effective. Nevertheless, more evidence is warranted before they can be labeled as the new standard of care.

EUS-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) sampling is being increasingly used. We performed a prospective randomized trial to compare specimen adequacy of a 19-gauge fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle with a 22-gauge FNB Franseen tip needle for EUS-LB sampling.

Forty-two consecutive patients referred for EUS-LB sampling were prospectively randomized to a 19-gauge or 22-gauge FNB needle. When the specimen with the 22-gauge needle was macroscopically inadequate, an additional pass with the 19-gauge needle was done. Bilobar EUS-LB sampling was performed with heparinized wet suction using 1 pass and 3 actuations per lobe. Descriptive statistics were computed for all variables.

Biopsy sampling was performed for abnormal liver enzymes in 95.5% of patients (57% women; average age, 51 years). Five patients undergoing sampling with the 22-gauge FNB needle had macroscopically inadequate specimens and required additional biopsy sampling with the 19-gauge FNB needle. Mean preprocessing length of the longest tissue core was 21.5 ± 6.3 mm with a 19-gauge FNB needle compared with 9.4 ± 5.5 mm with the 22-gauge FNB needle (P < .001). Postprocessing specimens were significantly longer with 19-gauge than with 22-gauge FNB needles (17.4 mm vs 6.8, P < .001). There were no adverse events, and postprocedure pain and discomfort was similar in both groups (14% for 19-gauge vs 10% for 22-gauge, P = .99).

Liver core biopsy sampling using the 19-gauge FNB needle is superior to the 22-gauge FNB needle in terms of length of longest core and aggregate specimen length. Considerably more fragmentation of the 22-gauge cores occurs during tissue processing. No increased postprocedure pain or AEs were found with the 19-gauge needle. A 19-gauge FNB needle is preferred to the 22-gauge FNB needle for EUS-LB. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT04806607.).

Background and study aims Favorable outcomes were noted with refinement in newer endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) needle tips. Still, the overall usefulness and benefit are yet to be well explored. Patients and methods This was a retrospective analysis of patients with EUS-LB (Franseen-tip 19G versus 22G FNB needle) over 2 years. EUS-LB was obtained in a one-pass, two-actuation, modified wet suction technique. Diagnostic yield, fragmentation rate, aggregate specimen length (AL), number of complete portal tracts (CPT), length of longest intact core (LIC), adverse events (AEs) (early), and cost of the procedure (1USD = 82 INR) were compared. Results Fifty-four patients (33 [61.1%], female) successfully underwent EUS-LB with a median age of 46 years (interquartile range [IQR] 34-54); the majority 32 (59.2%) underwent 19G biopsies. There was a significantly increased median (IQR) AL in the 19G compared with 22G (20 mm [19-21] vs. 15 [14-15], P < 0.001), respectively. Similarly, significantly lengthier median LIC and CPT were seen, respectively. A nonsignificant diagnostic yield was noted (100% vs. 90.9%, P = 0.082), respectively. The fragmentation rate was higher in 22G FNB needles (36.4% [95% CI 16-56] vs. 12.5% [95% CI 1-24], respectively; P = 0.038). Seven patients (12.9%) had mild AEs with no difference between groups. The average procedure cost with 19G was INR 63000 (768$), and with 22G needle was INR 54500 (664$). Conclusions The Franseen-tip 19G outperforms 22G with a significantly lower fragmentation rate, longer AL, LIC, and a higher number of CPT with a marginal increase in the procedure cost, without any difference in diagnostic yield and safety.

There is dramatically increased incidence of several liver diseases worldwide; thus, an unmet need to diagnose and stage these pathological entities heralds the wide application of liver biopsy (LB) techniques. The ways of LB are versatile, including percutaneous LB, transjugular LB, and more recently an approach of minimal invasiveness, that is, EUS-guided LB (EUS-LB). In this review article, we come to the conclusion that EUS-LB may serve as a feasible, reliable, and safe alternative to percutaneous LB and transjugular LB in terms of improved diagnostic yield, excellent sampling performance, and controlled adverse events among patients with focal, infiltrative, and parenchymal liver diseases. Furthermore, extensive efforts have been made to optimize and refine several technical pillars within EUS-LB modality such as the selection of needle size/type, priming manner of biopsy needle, and choice of pass/actuation technique, all of which aim at obtaining better specimen quantity and quality. Another advantageous aspect and unique property pertinent to EUS-guided modality indicate that multiple screening, surveillance, and intervention procedures can be combined into one single endoscopic session. Accordingly, some pilot studies have clarified the clinical usefulness by integrating EUS-LB with simultaneous measurement of portal pressure gradient or examination of liver stiffness. However, more studies, in particular, randomized controlled trials or real-world evidence, are practically warranted to elucidate the validity and safety of EUS-LB as a regular/routine part of managing liver diseases.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) is considered to be safe and effective. Commonly a 19-G fine-needle aspiration or biopsy needle is used. But, the results vary with different techniques that are used. Herein, we report the results of liver biopsy with a single-pass, three actuations (1:3) using the slow-pull technique.

In this prospective study, 50 consecutive patients with indications for liver biopsy underwent EUS-LB with a 19-gauge fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle from both right and left lobes. The primary outcome was the adequacy of the specimen for histological diagnosis. Total specimen length (TSL), longest specimen length (LSL), complete portal tracts (CPTs) and comparison of these outcomes between the left lobe and right lobe specimens were secondary outcomes. Adverse events (AEs) were also measured during this study.

Adequate tissue for histological diagnosis was obtained in all 50 patients (100%). The median number of CPTs was 32.5 (range, 11-58), while the median of TSL was 58 mm (range, 35-190) and the median LSL was 15 mm (range, 5-40). There was no significant difference in CPTs, TSL and LSL between left and right lobe biopsies. There was no major complication; one of the patients (2%) had bleed from the duodenal puncture site, which was managed endoscopically without the need for blood transfusion.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy using a 19-gauge Franseen tip needle with a single pass, three actuation (1:3) and slow-pull technique provides adequate tissue yield and has a good safety profile.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) is a novel liver biopsy technique. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EUS-LB in comparison with percutaneous liver biopsy (PLB).

This retrospective study evaluated the safety and efficacy of EUS-LB using a 19-gauge fine needle biopsy (FNB) needle compared with PLB using a spring-loaded 16-gauge needle in patients with diffuse liver disease at our hospital from April 2017 to December 2020. The primary outcomes included the total hepatic tissue surface area and the total number of portal tracts. Secondary outcomes included the success and adverse event rates.

Twenty patients each underwent EUS-LB and PLB. There was no statistical difference in the sum of liver tissue surface area (22 mm² vs 22.6 mm² , P = .910) and the total number of portal tracts (29 vs 25, P = .916). The success rate was 95% (19/20) for EUS-LB and 100% (20/20) for PLB (P = 1). There were two adverse events in the PLB group but none in the EUS-LB group (P = .487).

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy using FNB has an optimal tissue yield and success rate and is safe compared to PLB. Thus, EUS-LB may be a new alternative to PLB.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) offers the ability to obtain tissue material via a fine needle under direct visualization for cytological or pathological examination. Prior studies have looked at EUS tissue acquisition; however, most reports have been centered around lesions of the pancreas. This paper aims to review the literature on EUS tissue acquisition in other organs (beyond the pancreas) such as the liver, biliary tree, lymph nodes, and upper and lower gastrointestinal tracts. Furthermore, techniques for obtaining tissue samples under EUS guidance continue to evolve. Specifically, some of the techniques that endoscopists employ are suction techniques (i.e., dry heparin, dry suction technique, wet suction technique), the slow pull technique, and the fanning technique. Apart from acquisition techniques, the type and size of the needle utilized play a major role in the quality of samples. This review describes the indications for tissue acquisition for each organ, and also describes and compares the various tissue acquisition techniques, as well as the different needles used according to their shape and size.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has been an indispensable and widely used diagnostic tool in several medical fields, including gastroenterology, cardiology, and urology, due to its diverse therapeutic and diagnostic applications. Many studies show that it is effective and safe in patients with liver conditions where conventional endoscopy or cross-sectional imaging are inefficient or when surgical interventions pose high risks. In this article, we present a review of the current literature for the different diagnostic and therapeutic applications of EUS in liver diseases and their complications and discuss the potential future application of artificial intelligence analysis of EUS.

Background and study aims  Percutaneous liver biopsy is traditionally done on the right lobe of the liver. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) can be performed on either the left or right lobe or as a combined bi-lobar biopsy. Earlier studies did not compare the benefit of bi-lobar biopsies to single-lobe biopsy for reaching a tissue diagnosis. The current study compared the degree of agreement of pathological diagnosis between the left lobe of the liver compared to right-lobe and with bi-lobar biopsy. Patients and methods  Fifty patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria were enrolled in the study. EUS-LB with a 22G core needle was performed separately on both the liver lobes. Three pathologists, who were blinded to the site of biopsy independently reviewed the liver biopsies. Sample adequacy, safety, and concordance of pathological diagnosis between left- and right-lobe biopsy of the liver were analyzed. Results  The pathological diagnosis was made in 96 % of patients. Specimen lengths from the left lobe and the right lobe were 2.31 ± 0.57 cm and 2.28 ± 0.69 cm, respectively ( P  = 0.476). The respective number of portal tracts were 11.84 ± 6.71 versus 9.58 ± 7.14; P  = 0.106. Diagnosis between the two lobes showed substantial (κ = 0.830) concordance. Left-lobe (κ value 0.878) and right-lobe (κ = 0.903) biopsies showed no difference when compared with bi-lobar biopsies. Adverse events were observed in two patients, both of whom had biopsies of the right lobe. Conclusions  EUS-guided left-lobe liver biopsy is safer than right-lobe biopsy with similar diagnostic yield.

The 9-member Editorial Board of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy performed a systematic literature search of original articles published during 2021 in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and 10 other high-impact medical and gastroenterology journals on endoscopy-related topics. Votes from each editorial board member were tallied to identify a consensus list of the 10 most significant topic areas in GI endoscopy over the calendar year of study, with a focus on 3 criteria: significance, novelty, and global impact on clinical practice. The 10 areas identified collectively represent advances in the following endoscopic topics: colonoscopy optimization, bariatric endoscopy, endoscopic needle sampling and drainage, peroral endoscopic myotomy, endoscopic defect closure, meeting systemic challenges in endoscopic training and practice, endohepatology, FNA versus fine-needle biopsy sampling, endoscopic mucosal and submucosal procedures, and cold snare polypectomy. Each board member contributed a summary of important articles relevant to 1 to 2 of the consensus topic areas, leading to a collective summary that is presented in this document of the "top 10" endoscopic advances of 2021.

EUS has become an increasingly used diagnostic and therapeutic modality in the armamentarium of endoscopists. With ever-expanding indications, EUS is being used in patients with liver disease, for both diagnosis and therapy. EUS is playing an important role in providing additional important information to that provided by cross-sectional imaging modalities such as computerized tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Domains of therapy that were largely restricted to interventional radiologists have become accessible to endosonologists. From liver biopsy and sampling of liver lesions to ablative therapy for liver lesions and vascular interventions for varices, there is increased use of EUS in patients with liver disease. In this review, we discuss the various diagnostic and therapeutic applications of EUS in patients with various liver diseases.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) or fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) from focal liver lesions are indicated in selected cases, but there has been no previous comparison of needle types of the same size. The aim of our study was to compare the histologic diagnostic accuracy and adequacy of cores obtained with EUS-FNB needles in contrast to those obtained with FNA needles in focal liver lesions. This prospective one-center study included patients with left lobe hepatic focal lesions with contraindications for percutaneous liver biopsy or need for EUS for concomitant lesions. Each patient had one pass of 22G EUS-FNB (Franseen) needle and one pass of 22G EUS-FNA in a crossover manner, without macroscopic on-site evaluation. Each sample was analyzed separately for histologic adequacy and diagnosis. The final diagnosis was based on histology results or on imaging follow-up in the case of negative biopsies. The EUS-FNB samples (n = 30) were found to be more adequate for histologic analysis, with more cellularity and longer tissue aggregates than the EUS-FNA samples (n = 30). The accuracy of EUS-FNB was 100%, whereas that of EUS-FNA was 86.7% (p = 0.039). No post-procedure complications were noted. The 22G EUS-FNB needle proved superior to 22G EUS-FNA in terms of tissue acquisition diagnostic accuracy and histologic adequacy in focal liver lesions.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) is an evolving technique. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the value of EUS-LB for parenchymal and focal liver lesions. Besides, we aimed to assess the influences of needle-related factors on the performance of EUS-LB. Additionally, we aimed to assess the influence of various criteria on specimen adequacy.

We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library databases up to 10 October 2021. The primary outcome was diagnostic yield, specimen adequacy, qualified specimens evaluated by rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE). The secondary outcome was adverse events. Subgroup analyses were based on needle type, needle size, fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle type. A sensitivity analysis was conducted on specimen adequacy based on two definition criteria.

In total, 33 studies were included. Pooled rates of diagnostic yield, specimen adequacy, qualified specimen by ROSE, adverse events were 95%, 84%, 93%, 3%. Subgroup analyses showed that Acquire needles generated higher diagnostic yield than SharkCore needles (99% vs. 88%, p = .047). Additionally, FNB needles demonstrated a higher rate of adverse events than FNA needles (6% vs. 1%, p = .028). Sensitivity analysis on specimen adequacy based on various criteria demonstrated that the specimen adequacy rate defined by the AASLD criterion was lower than that of the commonly-used criterion (37% vs. 84%, p = .001).

EUS-LB is effective and safe for liver biopsy. Acquire needles provide better specimens than SharkCore needles. FNB needles may increase the risk of adverse events compared with FNA needles. The AASLD criterion is harder to achieve than the commonly-used criterion.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) has emerged as a safe and effective alternative to percutaneous and trans-jugular approaches for hepatic tissue acquisition. It has shown superior diagnostic yield for the targeted approach of focal lesions, less sampling variability, improved patient comfort, and safety profile. These advantages have contributed to the increased use of EUS-LB as a technique for obtaining liver tissue. In this review, we provide an update on the recent evidence of EUS-LB for the evaluation of liver disease.

1: ESGE recommends that, where there is a suspicion of eosinophilic esophagitis, at least six biopsies should be taken, two to four biopsies from the distal esophagus and two to four biopsies from the proximal esophagus, targeting areas with endoscopic mucosal abnormalities. Distal and proximal biopsies should be placed in separate containers.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. 2: ESGE recommends obtaining six biopsies, including from the base and edge of the esophageal ulcers, for histologic analysis in patients with suspected viral esophagitis.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. 3: ESGE recommends at least six biopsies are taken in cases of suspected advanced esophageal cancer and suspected advanced gastric cancer.Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. 4: ESGE recommends taking only one to two targeted biopsies for lesions in the esophagus or stomach that are potentially amenable to endoscopic resection (Paris classification 0-I, 0-II) in order to confirm the diagnosis and not compromise subsequent endoscopic resection.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. 5: ESGE recommends obtaining two biopsies from the antrum and two from the corpus in patients with suspected Helicobacter pylori infection and for gastritis staging.Strong recommendation, low quality of evidence. 6: ESGE recommends biopsies from or, if endoscopically resectable, resection of gastric adenomas.Strong recommendation, moderate quality of evidence. 7: ESGE recommends fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles equally for sampling of solid pancreatic masses.Strong recommendation, high quality evidence. 8: ESGE suggests performing peroral cholangioscopy (POC) and/or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition in indeterminate biliary strictures. For proximal and intrinsic strictures, POC is preferred. For distal and extrinsic strictures, EUS-guided sampling is preferred, with POC where this is not diagnostic.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence. 9: ESGE suggests obtaining possible non-neoplastic biopsies before sampling suspected malignant lesions to prevent intraluminal spread of malignant disease.Weak recommendation, low quality of evidence. 10: ESGE suggests dividing EUS-FNA material into smears (two per pass) and liquid-based cytology (LBC), or the whole of the EUS-FNA material can be processed as LBC, depending on local experience.Weak recommendation, low quality evidence.

As the burden of liver disease in the general populace steadily increases, so does the need for both advanced diagnostic and treatment options. Endoscopic ultrasound is a reliable diagnostic and therapeutic method that has an established role, foremost in pancreatobiliary pathology. This paper aims to summarize the growing role of endoscopic ultrasound in hepatology based on the search of the current literature. A number of applications of endoscopic ultrasound are reviewed, including both noninvasive methods and tissue acquisition in focal and diffuse liver disease, portal hypertension measurement, detection and management of gastric and esophageal varices, treatment of focal liver lesions and staging of pancreatobiliary malignancies, treatment of cystic and solid liver lesions, as well as liver abscess drainage. Both hepatologists and endoscopists should be aware of the evolving role of endoscopic ultrasound in liver disease. The inherent invasive nature of endoscopic examination limits its use to a targeted population identified using noninvasive methods. Endoscopic ultrasound is one the most versatile methods in gastroenterology, allowing immediate access with detection, sampling, and treatment of digestive tract pathology. Further expansion of its use in hepatology is immanent.

Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided liver biopsy is a novel technique to obtain adequate liver samples for diagnosis of liver parenchymal diseases. There are studies that have evaluated the feasibility and safety of EUS-guided parenchymal liver biopsy (EUS-LB), however, factors that can influence specimen quality are yet to be determined. Our aim was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-LB and evaluate factors associated with specimen quality.

We performed a detailed search of PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science™ databases to identify studies in which results of EUS-guided liver parenchymal biopsies were reported published up to July 2020. A random effects model was used to estimate pooled values (mean ± SE) for total specimen length (TSL) and complete portal tracts (CPT). Subgroup analyses were applied to find out the procedural factors associated with better specimen quality using Cochran's Q test. A total of 10 meta-analyses were done focusing on international studies. Total of 1326 patients who underwent EUS-LB. EUS-LBs performed for suspicion of parenchymal liver disease. Pooled mean values for TSL and CPT with subgroup analyses.

Twenty-three studies with a total of 1326 patients were included in our meta-analysis. Overall pooled mean TSL and CPT were 45.3 ± 4.6 mm and 15.8 ± 1.5, respectively. In subgroup analysis, core biopsy needles proved to better in terms of CPT than fine-needle aspiration needles (18.4 vs 10.99, p = 0.003). FNB with slow-pull or suction technique provided a similar TSL (44.3 vs 53.9 mm, p = 0.40), however, slow-pull technique was better in terms of CPT (30 vs 14.6, p < 0.001). Heterogeneity was present among the studies. Another limitation is the low number randomized control trials.

EUS-guided parenchymal liver biopsy is a good alternative to other methods of liver sampling. Using FNB needles with a slow-pull technique can provide better results.

Several reports have validated EUS-guided liver biopsy sampling (EUS-LB) as safe and effective. Nineteen-gauge EUS aspiration (FNA) or core (fine-needle biopsy [FNB]) needles are used, but different needle techniques can yield variable outcomes. Some data show that 1 pass (single liver puncture) with 1 actuation (1 to-and-fro needle movement) may be enough to obtain a satisfactory specimen. However, there has not been a head-to-head comparison of single versus multiple needle actuations for EUS-LB.

This was a prospective randomized trial of EUS-LB in 40 patients comparing tissue yields and adequacy using 1 pass, 1 actuation (1:1) versus 1 pass 3 actuations (1:3) of an FNB needle. The primary outcome was number of complete portal triads (CPTs). Secondary outcomes were length of the longest piece, aggregate specimen length, number of cores >9 mm, and adverse events (AEs). Computerized randomization determined selection (either 1:1 or 1:3 with fanning technique). Sample lengths were measured before pathologic processing.

Both groups had similar demographics and indications for EUS-LB. All biopsy samples were adequate for pathologic interpretation. Compared with 1:1, biopsy sampling with 1:3 yielded more CPTs (mean [standard deviation], 17.25 [6.2] vs 24.5 [9.88]; P < .008) and longer aggregate specimen length (6.89 cm [1.86] vs 12.85 cm [4.02]; P < .001). AEs were not statistically different between the techniques. No severe AEs were noted.

EUS-LB using the 1:3 technique produced longer liver cores with more CPTs than the 1:1 technique with an equivalent safety profile. Two needle passes are more likely to provide tissue adequacy according to the American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases guidelines. (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN 000040101.).

EUS-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) has been shown to be a safe and effective alternative to percutaneous liver biopsy. The optimal needle device and technique for EUS-LB is still evolving. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of two second-generation 19G fine-needle biopsy (FNB) (Franseen- and Fork-tip) devices for EUS-LB.

This is a repeated-measure crossover study with a prospectively maintained cohort of patients. We performed EUS-LB with a one-pass and single-actuation method using two 19G FNB needles in 22 consecutive patients between 10/2018 and 9/2019. Patients were randomized to left vs right liver lobes to be biopsied as well as the needle sequence. The specimens obtained were evaluated for adequacy for histologic diagnosis. The primary outcome was number of complete portal tracts (CPTs), post-fix aggregate, and longest specimen length. Secondary outcomes were prefix aggregate specimen length and the specimen adequacy judged by two expert pathologists.

A total of 44 liver biopsies were performed in 22 patients. The CPTs were higher in the Franseen-tip needle group compared to the Fork-tip needle group (14.4 vs 9.5, p = 0.043). Post-fix aggregate specimen length (44.9 mm vs 34.6 mm, p = 0.097), the post-fix longest specimen length (19.9 mm vs 13.7 mm, p = 0.175), and prefix aggregate specimen length (51.7 mm vs 45 mm, p = 0.265) were not significantly different. Both needles showed similarly high histologic adequacy (100% vs 95.5%, p = 0.312). Interestingly, the right of the liver showed higher yield of CPTs with both needles (Franseen, 16.2 vs. 12.8, p = 0.003, the Fork-tip, 12.8 vs. 7.0, p < 0.0001).

EUS-guided liver biopsy using the 19G Franseen-tip needle may provide more CPTs than 19G Fork-tip needle on a single-pass, single-actuation comparison.

Data on comparative efficacy of various available endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) needles are limited. We sought to compare the performance of a novel Franseen-tip 22G fine-needle biopsy (FNB) device to that of 19G needle platforms for liver parenchyma.

Consecutive patients referred for EUS and suspected to have hepatic parenchymal disease underwent EUS-LB using different EUS needles and were included in this retrospective study. Two blinded expert liver pathologists independently reviewed and reported on: total number of tissue fragments, length of longest fragment, number of complete and incomplete portal tracts (CPT and IPT), and specimen adequacy.

A 22G Franseen-tip needle (A) was used in 30 patients; 19G Tru-Cut needle (B) in 50 patients; 19G reverse beveled non-Tru-Cut needle (C) in 27 patients; and a 19G flexible non-Tru-Cut needle (D) in 28 patients. In the order of needles, A, B, C and D,  > 10 tissue fragments were obtained in 100%, 6%, 82%, and 96% samples, the mean number of CPTs was 6.9; 3.0; 7.3; and 16.9, length of longest fragment was 3.8, 4. 7, 3.9, and 8.4 mm, and specimen adequacy was 66.7%, 46%, 82.1%, and 81.5%, respectively. A positive correlation was obtained between number of CPTs and length of longest fragment in samples accrued by 19G needles.

EUS-LB specimens using 22G Franseen-tip needle appear highly fragmented, leading to inferior specimen adequacy compared to 19G non-Tru-Cut needles. We also report on using length of longest fragment as an additional criterion for specimen adequacy as it positively correlates with number of CPTs standard.

Intervention for liver disease has predominantly been performed through the percutaneous approach. However, as endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) applications have expanded, there have emerged various EUS-guided interventions for liver disease, a space we call "Endo-Hepatology". EUS-guided liver biopsy can be considered the "forerunner" of Endo-Hepatology and has become a clinical option for patients requiring histologic diagnosis and staging of their liver disease. EUS also enables direct access to the portal vein. Subsequently, many procedures are being explored, such as angiography, measurement of the portosystemic pressure gradient, portal vein sampling to detect cancer cell or DNA, and EUS-guided transhepatic intrahepatic portosystemic shunt creation. Since the transducer is close to the liver, especially the left and caudate lobes, EUS can be used as a rescue when the percutaneous approach is not favorable and EUS-guided treatments of liver tumor, cyst and abscess have been reported. This review summarizes the available studies of EUS-guided intervention in the liver.

The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the histological adequacy of the liver tissue specimens obtained with a 20-gauge fine-needle biopsy needle and the secondary aim was to test the safety endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy with a 20-gauge fine-needle biopsy needle with the wet-heparinized suction technique.

Forty patients who underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy were included in the study. A 20-gauge fine-needle biopsy needle was used with the wet-heparinized suction technique to make one pass each from the left and the right lobe. Histologic characteristics of the specimens were evaluated, and patients were observed after the procedure in order to intervene in case of an adverse event.

The median longest core fragment was 22 mm from the left lobe [first quartile-third quartile 20-25 mm, interquartile range (IQR) 5 mm], and 20 mm (first quartile-third quartile 17-22 mm, IQR 5 mm) from the right lobe. The median cumulative core length per patient was 103 mm (91-108 mm, IQR 17 mm). The median cumulative number of complete portal triads per patient was 69.50 (52.25-82.25, IQR 30). The rate of diagnostic yield was 100%. Post-biopsy self-limiting abdominal pain was reported in two patients (5%). The most common histologic diagnosis was fatty liver disease (25%).

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy with the wet-heparinized suction technique using a 20-gauge fine-needle biopsy needle is a safe alternative method in clinical practice.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and fine needle biopsy (FNB) are effective techniques that are widely used for tissue acquisition. However, it remains unclear how to obtain high-quality specimens. Therefore, we conducted a survey of EUS-FNA and FNB techniques to determine practice patterns worldwide and to develop strong recommendations based on the experience of experts in the field.

This was a worldwide multi-institutional survey among members of the International Society of EUS Task Force (ISEUS-TF). The survey was administered by E-mail through the SurveyMonkey website. In some cases, percentage agreement with some statements was calculated; in others, the options with the greatest numbers of responses were summarized. Another questionnaire about the level of recommendation was designed to assess the respondents' answers.

ISEUS-TF members developed a questionnaire containing 17 questions that was sent to 53 experts. Thirty-five experts completed the survey within the specified period. Among them, 40% and 54.3% performed 50-200 and more than 200 EUS sampling procedures annually, respectively. Some practice patterns regarding FNA/FNB were recommended.

This is the first worldwide survey of EUS-FNA and FNB practice patterns. The results showed wide variations in practice patterns. Randomized studies are urgently needed to establish the best approach for optimizing the FNA/FNB procedures.

Liver diseases are amongst the most common diseases worldwide and manifest as a parenchymatic and/or biliary injury due to several causes as well as focal liver lesions, ranging from benign to malignant ones. The diagnosis of liver diseases is based mainly on biochemical and advanced imaging studies and, when required, on liver biopsy. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), which combines endoscopy and ultrasonography, is one of the main examination techniques used in gastroenterology as it is applied to evaluate abnormalities in the lumen of the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract and to define pancreatic and hepato-biliary features, often in chronic patients. Given its high spatial resolution and its proximity to the liver, EUS is gaining popularity in the diagnostic work up of liver diseases. This is a comprehensive overview of the current literature on the diagnostic indications for EUS use in patients with liver diseases. We performed a MEDLINE\PubMed and Embase search, and all articles that were relevant, after reviewing abstracts, were assessed and the full text was analyzed to extract data regarding technical success, diagnostic yield, bioptic characteristics, and complications rate. EUS-guided imaging and biopsy techniques in liver diseases have shown consistent favorable promising results among the reports through the literature, with an excellent diagnostic yield and safety profile, especially in the context of focal lesions and portal hypertension. The application of EUS in the diagnosis of liver diseases is a promising technique and should be considered as a first-line therapeutic option in selected cases.

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is a minimally invasive diagnostic and therapeutic modality with a number of established as well as evolving uses in patients with chronic liver disease. Compared to other diagnostic tools such as cross-sectional imaging or conventional endoscopy, EUS has been shown to increase diagnostic sensitivity and therapeutic success for many clinical scenarios and applications with a low rate of adverse events. In this review, we discuss and focus on the current and growing role of EUS in the evaluation and/or treatment of hepatobiliary masses, hepatic parenchymal disease, portal hypertension, esophageal and other varices, and indeterminate biliary strictures.

There is limited literature on endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB), a new method of obtaining liver biopsy (LB).

We conducted a retrospective study of the efficacy and safety of EUS-LB compared to percutaneous liver biopsy (PC-LB) in patients with chronic liver disease at our center between January 2018 and August 2019.

Thirty patients underwent EUS-LB and 60 patients underwent PC-LB were identified (median follow-up post-LB was 8 days; interquartile range (IQR), 3-5 days). The median number of portal tracts was significantly higher in the PC-LB group (13 vs. 5; P < 0.0001). A histologic diagnosis was established in 93% of the EUS-LB group, compared to 100% in the PC-LB group (P = 0.841). Patients in EUS-LB group had significantly shorter hospital stay (median time of hospital stay was 3 vs. 4.2 h in the EUS-LB vs. PC-LB group, respectively; P = 0.004) and reported less pain compared to PC-LB group (median pain score was 0 vs. 3.5; P = 0.0009). EUS-LB were performed using a 19-gauge (n = 27) or 22-gauge (n = 3); there was a tendency towards higher number of portal tracts in the 22- vs. the 19-gauge needle group (6 vs. 5; P = 0.501). No patient in either group had significant adverse events such as bleeding or death.

EUS-LB is safe and is associated with less pain, shorter hospital stay, and high diagnostic yield (93%) compared to PC-LB. Randomized trials are needed to standardize the utility of EUS-LB.

Liver biopsy (LB) is an essential tool in diagnosing, evaluating and managing various diseases of the liver. As such, histopathological results are critical as they establish or aid in diagnosis, provide information on prognosis, and guide the appropriate selection of medical therapy for patients. Indications for LB include evaluation of persistent elevation of liver chemistries of unclear etiology, diagnosis of chronic liver diseases such as Wilson's disease, autoimmune hepatitis, small duct primary sclerosing cholangitis, work up of fever of unknown origin, amyloidosis and more. Traditionally, methods of acquiring liver tissue have included percutaneous LB (PCLB), transjugular LB (TJLB) or biopsy taken surgically via laparotomy or laparoscopy. However, traditional methods of LB may be inferior to newer methods. Additionally, PCLB and TJLB carry higher risks of adverse events and complications. More recently, endoscopic ultrasound guided LB (EUS-LB) has evolved as an alternative method of tissue sampling that has proven to be safe and effective, with limited adverse events. Compared to PC and TJ routes, EUS-LB may also have a greater diagnostic yield of tissue, be superior for a targeted approach of focal lesions, provide higher quality images and allow for greater patient comfort. These advantages have contributed to the increased use of EUS-LB as a technique for obtaining liver tissue. Herein, we provide a review of the recent evidence of EUS-LB for liver disease.

Diagnostic tools for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) detection and prognostication are limited, with histology remaining the criterion standard. We evaluated the feasibility and safety of EUS-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) sampling in NAFLD staging.

In a prospective cohort of NAFLD patients with steatohepatitis and early liver fibrosis based on magnetic resonance elastography (MRE), EUS-LB sampling procedures were performed using a 22-gauge fork-tip core biopsy needle. Samples were evaluated by a blinded pathologist. Total aggregate sample length (TASL), number of complete portal triads, ability to calculate NAFLD activity score, ability to stage liver fibrosis, and ability to provide enough core liver tissue for lipidomics analysis were evaluated. Performance of EUS-LB sampling was compared with MRE.

Forty-one EUS-LB samples were obtained. The median TASL was 2.4 cm (interquartile range, 2.00-2.75). The median number of complete portal triads per TASL was 26 (interquartile range, 7-62). Of the samples, 100% were adequate to convey NAFLD activity score and fibrosis stage. All samples provided enough core liver tissue to allow the application of lipidomics testing. A significant positive linear association between EUS-LB sampling-detected fibrosis and MRE-detected fibrosis was observed (r = .469, P < .005). Compared with MRE, EUS-LB sampling established early fibrosis in 13 cases that MRE classified as normal. EUS-LB sampling-related adverse events occurred in 7% and were restricted to postprocedural pain.

EUS-LB sampling is a viable technique for full NAFLD evaluation and may be superior to MRE in establishing the diagnosis of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis with early fibrosis. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02880189.).