Comparison of the Diagnostic Efficiency of Radial- and Convex-Arrayed Echoendoscopes for Indirect Findings of Pancreatic Cancer: A Retrospective Comparative Study Using Propensity Score Method

SIMPLE SUMMARY: Pancreatic cancer (PC) has a poor prognosis; however, diagnosing PC at an earlier stage could improve long-term patient outcomes. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) plays an important role in PC detection, and the indirect findings (caliber change, retention cysts, and dilatation of the branch duct) that are detected by EUS are especially important for the early detection of PC. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the diagnostic efficacy of radial- and convex-arrayed echoendoscope for the detection rate of indirect findings. As a result, the radial-arrayed echoendoscope was found to be an independent detection factor of indirect findings by multivariate analysis. The radial-arrayed echoendoscope is useful for the detection of indirect findings. ABSTRACT: Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is useful for detecting early-stage pancreatic cancer. Because the detection of small lesions is difficult, it is important to detect indirect findings, namely caliber change, retention cysts, and dilatation of the branch duct, during the procedure. Although two types of EUS endoscopes are frequently used, there is no comparative study on their efficacy for detecting indirect findings. Therefore, we aimed to compare the diagnostic efficacy of these two types for indirect findings. We retrospectively analyzed 316 consecutive patients who had undergone EUS for pancreaticobiliary disease at a single center between January 2017 and December 2018. The main outcome was the detection rate of indirect findings and its comparison between the two echoendoscope types. This outcome was achieved using the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis. The detection rate of indirect findings was higher for the radial-arrayed endoscope than for the convex-arrayed echoendoscope (9.2% vs. 2.3% (p = 0.02)). The univariate analysis also revealed that the radial-arrayed echoendoscope was significantly superior to the convex-arrayed echoendoscope in terms of the detection of indirect findings (odds ratio, 5.94; 95% confidence interval, 1.68–21.10; p = 0.01) after IPTW. After adjustment for magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT), radial-arrayed echoendoscope remained an independent factor for indirect finding detection (odds ratio, 6.04; 95% confidence interval, 1.74–21.00; p = 0.01). Finally, five patients who had indirect EUS findings were diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. Our results indicate that the radial-arrayed echoendoscope is useful for the detection of indirect findings.