Comparison between two types of needles for Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine aspiration biopsy of pancreatic and upper gastrointestinal masses.
Franseen fine-needle biopsy needle
acquire fine-needle biopsy needle
endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration
fine-needle aspiration
fine-needle biopsy
Journal
Diagnostic cytopathology
ISSN: 1097-0339
Titre abrégé: Diagn Cytopathol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8506895
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2020
Mar 2020
Historique:
received:
19
04
2019
revised:
29
10
2019
accepted:
13
11
2019
pubmed:
19
12
2019
medline:
3
10
2020
entrez:
19
12
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) has long been the main method for sampling pancreatic lesions. Recently, the method of fine-needle biopsy (FNB) was introduced in practice, allowing for the acquisition of tissue cores while aspirating the lesion. We hereby report our experience with a new FNB needle compared with the standard FNA needle. Retrospective data from our department were collected on patients who underwent FNB using the Acquire EUS-FNB needle (Boston Scientific, Massachusetts) and FNA using the EchoTip Ultra EUS-FNA Needle (Cook Medical, Indiana) between January 2017 and February 2018. The cases were reviewed independently by two cytopathologists and evaluated for the presence of cell block or core tissue material, adequacy for potential ancillary testing, and number of passes. The number of passes ranged from 1 to 16, with a mean of 5.52 ± 3.74 in the FNA group, and from 1 to 6, with a mean of 2.74 ± 1.11 passes in the FNB group (P < .0001). Tissue cores were present in 87.23% of the FNB needle samples. A cell block was adequate in 36.36% of cases using the FNA needle. The diagnostic yield as well as the adequacy for ancillary testing were significantly different between the two groups (P = .0001). The tumor size, location and patients' demographics were not statistically significant between the two groups. Compared with the conventional needle, the new FNB needle was associated with a lower number of passes and a better yield for histological material.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) has long been the main method for sampling pancreatic lesions. Recently, the method of fine-needle biopsy (FNB) was introduced in practice, allowing for the acquisition of tissue cores while aspirating the lesion. We hereby report our experience with a new FNB needle compared with the standard FNA needle.
METHODS
METHODS
Retrospective data from our department were collected on patients who underwent FNB using the Acquire EUS-FNB needle (Boston Scientific, Massachusetts) and FNA using the EchoTip Ultra EUS-FNA Needle (Cook Medical, Indiana) between January 2017 and February 2018. The cases were reviewed independently by two cytopathologists and evaluated for the presence of cell block or core tissue material, adequacy for potential ancillary testing, and number of passes.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The number of passes ranged from 1 to 16, with a mean of 5.52 ± 3.74 in the FNA group, and from 1 to 6, with a mean of 2.74 ± 1.11 passes in the FNB group (P < .0001). Tissue cores were present in 87.23% of the FNB needle samples. A cell block was adequate in 36.36% of cases using the FNA needle. The diagnostic yield as well as the adequacy for ancillary testing were significantly different between the two groups (P = .0001). The tumor size, location and patients' demographics were not statistically significant between the two groups.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Compared with the conventional needle, the new FNB needle was associated with a lower number of passes and a better yield for histological material.
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
197-202Informations de copyright
© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Références
Hewitt MJ, McPhail MJ, Possamai L, Dhar A, Vlavianos P, Monahan KJ. EUS-guided FNA for diagnosis of solid pancreatic neoplasms: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;75:319-331.
Wani S, Muthusamy VR, Komanduri S. EUS-guided tissue acquisition: an evidence-based approach (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;80:939-59.e7.
Muniraj T, Aslanian HR. New developments in endoscopic ultrasound tissue acquisition. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2017;27:585-599.
Khan MA, Grimm IS, Ali B, et al. A meta-analysis of endoscopic ultrasound-fine-needle aspiration compared to endoscopic ultrasound-fine-needle biopsy: diagnostic yield and the value of onsite cytopathological assessment. Endosc Int Open. 2017;5:E363-E375.
Varadarajulu S, Fraig M, Schmulewitz N, et al. Comparison of EUS-guided 19-gauge Trucut needle biopsy with EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration. Endoscopy. 2004;36:397-401.
Fernandez-Esparrach G, Sendino O, Sole M, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and trucut biopsy in the diagnosis of gastric stromal tumors: a randomized crossover study. Endoscopy. 2010;42:292-299.
Sakamoto H, Kitano M, Komaki T, et al. Prospective comparative study of the EUS guided 25-gauge FNA needle with the 19-gauge Trucut needle and 22-gauge FNA needle in patients with solid pancreatic masses. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;24:384-390.
Gerke H, Rizk MK, Vanderheyden AD, Jensen CS. Randomized study comparing endoscopic ultrasound-guided Trucut biopsy and fine needle aspiration with high suction. Cytopathology. 2010;21:44-51.
Polkowski M, Gerke W, Jarosz D, et al. Diagnostic yield and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided trucut [corrected] biopsy in patients with gastric submucosal tumors: a prospective study. Endoscopy. 2009;41:329-334.
Shah SM, Ribeiro A, Levi J, et al. EUS-guided fine needle aspiration with and without Trucut biopsy of pancreatic masses. JOP. 2008;9:422-430.
DeWitt J, Cho CM, Lin J, et al. Comparison of EUS-guided tissue acquisition using two different 19-gauge core biopsy needles: a multicenter, prospective, randomized, and blinded study. Endosc Int Open. 2015;3:E471-E478.
Naveed M, Siddiqui AA, Kowalski TE, et al. A multicenter comparative trial of a novel EUS-guided core biopsy needle (SharkCore™) with the 22-gauge needle in patients with solid pancreatic mass lesions. Endosc Ultrasound. 2018;7:34-40.
Bang JY, Hebert-Magee S, Hasan MK, Navaneethan U, Hawes R, Varadarajulu S. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biopsy using a Franseen needle design: initial assessment. Dig Endosc. 2017;29:338-346.
Mukai S, Itoi T, Yamaguchi H, et al. A retrospective histological comparison of EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy using a novel Franseen needle and a conventional end-cut type needle. Endosc Ultrasound. 2019;8:50-57.
El H II, Wu H, Reuss S, et al. Prospective assessment of the performance of a new fine needle biopsy device for EUS-guided sampling of solid lesions. Clin Endosc. 2018;51:576-583.
Adler DG, Muthusamy VR, Ehrlich DS, et al. A multicenter evaluation of a new EUS core biopsy needle: experience in 200 patients. Endosc Ultrasound. 2019;8(2):99-104.
Fujii LL, Levy MJ. Pitfalls in EUS FNA. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2014;24:125-142.