Literature DB >> 19032453

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.

Hiroki Sakamoto1, Masayuki Kitano, Takamitsu Komaki, Kazu Noda, Takaaki Chikugo, Kensaku Dote, Yoshifumi Takeyama, Kunal Das, Kenji Yamao, Masatoshi Kudo.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: The aim of this prospective study was to compare fine-needle aspiration guided by endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS-FNA) using 25-gauge and 22-gauge needles with the EUS-guided 19-gauge Trucut needle biopsy (EUS-TNB) in patients with solid pancreatic mass. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-four consecutive patients with pancreatic mass underwent biopsies by both EUS-FNA and EUS-TNB. Three needles were compared with respect to technical success rate, tissue size obtained, overall diagnostic accuracy and accuracy for histological and cytological diagnosis.
RESULTS: The 25-gauge EUS-FNA was technically easier and obtained superior overall diagnostic accuracy than the 22-gauge and Trucut needles, especially in lesions of the pancreas head and uncinate process. Overall accuracy for the 25-gauge, 22-gauge and Trucut needle was 91.7%, 79.7% and 54.1%, respectively. Accuracy for cytological diagnosis irrespective the site of lesions with 25-gauge, 22-gauge and Trucut needles was 91.7%, 75.0%, and 45.8%, respectively. For uncinate masses, it was 100%, 33.3%, and 0.0%, respectively. These differences were significant. Among technically successful patients, the accuracy for histological diagnosis using the 25-gauge was significantly inferior (P < 0.05) to 22-gauge and Trucut needles and the rates were 45.8%, 78.9% and 83.3%.
CONCLUSIONS: The 25-gauge FNA needle was significantly superior in terms of technical success rate and overall diagnostic accuracy, especially for the head and uncinate lesions, compared to the 22-gauge and Trucut needles and could be considered 'the best choice needle for cytological diagnosis' of solid pancreatic lesions. If histological diagnosis is required, the 22-gauge FNA needle and Trucut needle may be advantageous for use in head/uncinate and body/tail lesions, respectively.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19032453     DOI: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2008.05636.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gastroenterol Hepatol        ISSN: 0815-9319            Impact factor:   4.029


  79 in total

1.  Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration with 22- and 25-gauge needles in the same patients.

Authors:  Mitsuhiro Kida; Masao Araki; Shiro Miyazawa; Hiroko Ikeda; Miyoko Takezawa; Hidehiko Kikuchi; Maya Watanabe; Hiroshi Imaizumi; Wasaburo Koizumi
Journal:  J Interv Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-07-01

2.  Fine needle aspiration at endoscopic ultrasound with a novel side-port needle: a pilot experience.

Authors:  Arthur Kaffes; Crispin Corte
Journal:  Therap Adv Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 4.409

Review 3.  Endoscopic ultrasound advances, part 1: diagnosis.

Authors:  Edward Kim; Jennifer J Telford
Journal:  Can J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 3.522

Review 4.  Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration and useful ancillary methods.

Authors:  Mario Tadic; Tajana Stoos-Veic; Rajko Kusec
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2014-10-21       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Diagnostic yield of small histological cores obtained with a new EUS-guided fine needle biopsy system.

Authors:  Takuya Ishikawa; Rachid Mohamed; Steven J Heitman; Christian Turbide; Puja R Kumar; Hidemi Goto; Yoshiki Hirooka; Paul J Belletrutti
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-05-10       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 6.  Rapid on-site evaluation increases endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration adequacy for pancreatic lesions.

Authors:  Robert L Schmidt; Benjamin L Witt; Anna P Matynia; Gonzalo Barraza; Lester J Layfield; Douglas G Adler
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2012-10-04       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 7.  Needle size has only a limited effect on outcomes in EUS-guided fine needle aspiration: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kajsa E Affolter; Robert L Schmidt; Anna P Matynia; Douglas G Adler; Rachel E Factor
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2012-10-21       Impact factor: 3.199

8.  Diagnostic ability and factors affecting accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for pancreatic solid lesions: Japanese large single center experience.

Authors:  Shin Haba; Kenji Yamao; Vikram Bhatia; Nobumasa Mizuno; Kazuo Hara; Susumu Hijioka; Hiroshi Imaoka; Yasumasa Niwa; Masahiro Tajika; Shinya Kondo; Tsutomu Tanaka; Yasuhiro Shimizu; Yasushi Yatabe; Waki Hosoda; Hiroshi Kawakami; Naoya Sakamoto
Journal:  J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-10-24       Impact factor: 7.527

9.  Ultrasound-guided vs endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for pancreatic cancer diagnosis.

Authors:  Masato Matsuyama; Hiroshi Ishii; Kensuke Kuraoka; Seigo Yukisawa; Akiyoshi Kasuga; Masato Ozaka; Sho Suzuki; Kouichi Takano; Yuko Sugiyama; Takao Itoi
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2013-04-21       Impact factor: 5.742

10.  A prospective comparison of EUS-guided FNA using 25-gauge and 22-gauge needles.

Authors:  Hiroo Imazu; Yujiro Uchiyama; Hiroshi Kakutani; Kei-Ichi Ikeda; Kazuki Sumiyama; Mitsuru Kaise; Salem Omar; Tiing Leong Ang; Hisao Tajiri
Journal:  Gastroenterol Res Pract       Date:  2009-11-17       Impact factor: 2.260

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.