BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has a diagnostic accuracy of 70-90%, depending on the site under evaluation. In order to improve EUS-guided tissue sampling a novel 19-gauge trucut-type needle has been designed to obtain core biopsies during EUS. We prospectively evaluated the safety and accuracy of EUS-FNA alone versus combined EUS-FNA and trucut needle biopsy (TNB) in patients referred to our Unit over a 3-year period. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 159 patients underwent EUS-FNA alone (lesions<2 cm) or the combination of both sampling modalities (lesions>or=2 cm). The adequacy of sampling, sensitivity, specificity and overall accuracies of EUS-FNA or EUS-TNB alone and combined EUS-FNA/TNB were determined. RESULTS: Adequate samples were obtained by EUS-FNA, EUS-TNB and EUS-FNA/TNB in 91%, 88% and 97% of patients, respectively. From the pancreas (n=83), adequate samples were obtained by FNA in 94% and by TNB in 81%, compared with 87% and 92% from non-pancreatic sites (n=76), respectively. The combination of both techniques resulted in more adequate samples from non-pancreatic cases than EUS-FNA alone (P=0.044). The specificity was 100%. Overall accuracy for EUS-FNA alone was 77%, for EUS-TNB alone 73% and for EUS-FNA/TNB 91% (P=0.008). For pancreatic sampling, the accuracy of EUS-FNA alone was 77%, for EUS-TNB alone 56% and for EUS-FNA/TNB 83%. For non-pancreatic sampling, the accuracy for EUS-FNA alone was 78%, for EUS-TNB alone 83% and for EUS-FNA/TNB 95% (P=0.006). The complication rate was 0.6%. CONCLUSIONS: Combined EUS-FNA/TNB for lesions>or=2 cm improves adequacy of sampling and diagnostic accuracy compared with either technique alone and is safe.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has a diagnostic accuracy of 70-90%, depending on the site under evaluation. In order to improve EUS-guided tissue sampling a novel 19-gauge trucut-type needle has been designed to obtain core biopsies during EUS. We prospectively evaluated the safety and accuracy of EUS-FNA alone versus combined EUS-FNA and trucut needle biopsy (TNB) in patients referred to our Unit over a 3-year period. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 159 patients underwent EUS-FNA alone (lesions<2 cm) or the combination of both sampling modalities (lesions>or=2 cm). The adequacy of sampling, sensitivity, specificity and overall accuracies of EUS-FNA or EUS-TNB alone and combined EUS-FNA/TNB were determined. RESULTS: Adequate samples were obtained by EUS-FNA, EUS-TNB and EUS-FNA/TNB in 91%, 88% and 97% of patients, respectively. From the pancreas (n=83), adequate samples were obtained by FNA in 94% and by TNB in 81%, compared with 87% and 92% from non-pancreatic sites (n=76), respectively. The combination of both techniques resulted in more adequate samples from non-pancreatic cases than EUS-FNA alone (P=0.044). The specificity was 100%. Overall accuracy for EUS-FNA alone was 77%, for EUS-TNB alone 73% and for EUS-FNA/TNB 91% (P=0.008). For pancreatic sampling, the accuracy of EUS-FNA alone was 77%, for EUS-TNB alone 56% and for EUS-FNA/TNB 83%. For non-pancreatic sampling, the accuracy for EUS-FNA alone was 78%, for EUS-TNB alone 83% and for EUS-FNA/TNB 95% (P=0.006). The complication rate was 0.6%. CONCLUSIONS: Combined EUS-FNA/TNB for lesions>or=2 cm improves adequacy of sampling and diagnostic accuracy compared with either technique alone and is safe.
Authors: Sachin Wani; Michael B Wallace; Jonathan Cohen; Irving M Pike; Douglas G Adler; Michael L Kochman; John G Lieb; Walter G Park; Maged K Rizk; Mandeep S Sawhney; Nicholas J Shaheen; Jeffrey L Tokar Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2014-12-02 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Chang Yun Hwang; Sang Soo Lee; Tae Jun Song; Sung-Hoon Moon; Don Lee; Do Hyun Park; Dong Wan Seo; Sung Koo Lee; Myung-Hwan Kim Journal: Gut Liver Date: 2009-06-30 Impact factor: 4.519