Literature DB >> 24325591

Comparison of 22-gauge aspiration needle with 22-gauge biopsy needle in endoscopic ultrasonography-guided subepithelial tumor sampling.

Gwang Ha Kim1, Yu Kyung Cho, Eun Young Kim, Hyung Kil Kim, Jin Woong Cho, Tae Hee Lee, Jeong Seop Moon.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) may facilitate tissue sampling for histopathological diagnosis of subepithelial tumors (SETs) in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. However, immunohistochemistry is not always feasible using EUS-FNA samples due to the low quality of specimens often obtained by aspiration. This study aimed to compare the use of 22-gauge (G) EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) with 22G EUS-FNA for core sampling used for histopathological examination, including immunohistochemistry, in patients with GI SETs. METHODS. Twenty-eight patients with GI SETs ≥2 cm in size were prospectively enrolled at five university hospitals in Korea between January and June 2013. They were randomized to undergo either EUS-FNB or EUS-FNA. RESULTS. A total of 22 patients was finally analyzed in this study: 10 and 12 patients underwent EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB, respectively. Compared to the EUS-FNA group, the EUS-FNB group had a significantly lower median number of needle passes to obtain macroscopically optimal core samples (4 vs. 2, p = 0.025); higher yield rates of macroscopically and histologically optimal core samples with three needle passes (30% vs. 92%, p = 0.006; 20% vs. 75%, p = 0.010, respectively); and a higher diagnostic sufficiency rate (20% vs. 75%, p = 0.010). No technical difficulties were encountered in either group. CONCLUSIONS. This study shows that EUS-FNB has a better ability to obtain histological core samples and a higher diagnostic sufficiency rate than EUS-FNA and that EUS-FNB is a feasible, safe, and preferable modality for adequate core sampling for histopathological diagnosis of GI SETs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24325591     DOI: 10.3109/00365521.2013.867361

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Scand J Gastroenterol        ISSN: 0036-5521            Impact factor:   2.423


  49 in total

1.  Diagnostic efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided needle sampling for upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xiao-Cen Zhang; Quan-Lin Li; Yong-Fu Yu; Li-Qing Yao; Mei-Dong Xu; Yi-Qun Zhang; Yun-Shi Zhong; Wei-Feng Chen; Ping-Hong Zhou
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2015-08-27       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Yields and Utility of Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided 19-Gauge Trucut Biopsy versus 22-Gauge Fine Needle Aspiration for Diagnosing Gastric Subepithelial Tumors.

Authors:  Hee Kyong Na; Jeong Hoon Lee; Young Soo Park; Ji Yong Ahn; Kwi-Sook Choi; Do Hoon Kim; Kee Don Choi; Ho June Song; Gin Hyug Lee; Hwoon-Yong Jung; Jin-Ho Kim
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2015-03-27

3.  Diagnostic ability of a 22G Franseen needle in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of subepithelial lesions.

Authors:  Akashi Fujita; Shomei Ryozawa; Masanori Kobayashi; Ryuichiro Araki; Koji Nagata; Kazuhiro Minami; Yuki Tanisaka; Tsutomu Kobatake; Masafumi Mizuide
Journal:  Mol Clin Oncol       Date:  2018-09-03

4.  EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling versus FNA in the diagnosis of subepithelial lesions: a large multicenter study.

Authors:  Diogo T H de Moura; Thomas R McCarty; Pichamol Jirapinyo; Igor B Ribeiro; Victor K Flumignan; Fedaa Najdawai; Marvin Ryou; Linda S Lee; Christopher C Thompson
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2020-02-25       Impact factor: 9.427

5.  Successful creation of pancreatic cancer organoids by means of EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling for personalized cancer treatment.

Authors:  Herve Tiriac; Juan Carlos Bucobo; Demetrios Tzimas; Suman Grewel; Joseph F Lacomb; Leahana M Rowehl; Satish Nagula; Maoxin Wu; Joseph Kim; Aaron Sasson; Shivakumar Vignesh; Laura Martello; Maria Munoz-Sagastibelza; Jonathan Somma; David A Tuveson; Ellen Li; Jonathan M Buscaglia
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2018-01-09       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  Endoscopic resection for duodenal subepithelial tumors: a single-center experience.

Authors:  Tae Wook Kim; Gwang Ha Kim; Do Youn Park; Sangjeong Ahn; Won Lim; Bon Eun Lee; Geun Am Song
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-08-23       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Preoperative predictive factors for gastrointestinal stromal tumors: analysis of 375 surgically resected gastric subepithelial tumors.

Authors:  Yang Won Min; Ha Na Park; Byung-Hoon Min; Dongil Choi; Kyoung-Mee Kim; Sung Kim
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2014-12-04       Impact factor: 3.452

8.  Addition of Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration and On-Site Cytology to EUS-Guided Fine Needle Biopsy Increases Procedure Time but Not Diagnostic Accuracy.

Authors:  Rajesh N Keswani; Kumar Krishnan; Sachin Wani; Laurie Keefer; Srinadh Komanduri
Journal:  Clin Endosc       Date:  2014-05-31

Review 9.  Systematic Endoscopic Approach for Diagnosing Gastric Subepithelial Tumors.

Authors:  Gwang Ha Kim
Journal:  Gut Liver       Date:  2022-01-15       Impact factor: 4.519

Review 10.  Advancements in the Diagnosis of Gastric Subepithelial Tumors.

Authors:  Osamu Goto; Mitsuru Kaise; Katsuhiko Iwakiri
Journal:  Gut Liver       Date:  2022-05-15       Impact factor: 4.519

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.