Literature DB >> 24877242

Randomized controlled trial comparing stylet-free endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration with 22-G and 25-G needles.

Antonio Z Gimeno-García, Ahmed Elwassief, Sarto C Paquin, Gilles Gariépy, Anand V Sahai.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Previous studies comparing endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) results with different gauge needles have all been carried out with the stylet in place and show no clear advantage to the larger 22-G needle. Similar data for stylet-free EUS-FNA (SF-EUS-FNA) are unavailable. The aim of the present study was to determine whether diagnostic yield and specimen adequacy is superior with the 22-G needle as compared to the 25-G needle.
METHODS: All patients ≥ 18 years referred for solid-lesion EUS-FNA were eligible. Patients with suspected diagnosis of lymphoma, gastrointestinal stromal tumor, sarcoidosis, significant coagulopathy (international normalized ratio > 1.5 or platelets < 50000/mm(3)), use of clopidogrel within 7 days of EUS, and pregnancy were excluded. The two needles were compared regarding diagnostic yield, sample adequacy, bloodiness, ease of puncture, visibility, number of passes, failures, and complications.
RESULTS: One hundred and twenty consecutive patients were included and 126 lesions were sampled. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value for the 22-G SF-EUS-FNA were 83%, 100%, 100% and 56%, respectively, and for the 25-G SF-EUS-FNA were 88.8%, 100%, 100% and 76.5%, respectively (P=NS). There were no significant differences between the 22-G and the 25-G FNA needles in sample adequacy, bloodiness, ease of puncture, FNA failure, visibility, number of passes and complications; and no significant differences between either needle were found in relation to lesion site.
CONCLUSION: For SF-EUS-FNA, the larger 22-G needle offers no advantage over the smaller 25-G needle.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24877242     DOI: 10.1111/den.12204

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dig Endosc        ISSN: 0915-5635            Impact factor:   7.559


  12 in total

Review 1.  Imaging modalities for characterising focal pancreatic lesions.

Authors:  Lawrence Mj Best; Vishal Rawji; Stephen P Pereira; Brian R Davidson; Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-04-17

2.  Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic lesions with 22 versus 25 Gauge needles: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Antonio Facciorusso; Elisa Stasi; Marianna Di Maso; Gaetano Serviddio; Mohammed Salah Ali Hussein; Nicola Muscatiello
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2016-11-17       Impact factor: 4.623

Review 3.  Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration of Pancreatic Lesions: A Systematic Review of Technical and Procedural Variables.

Authors:  Bhairvi S Jani; Fadi Rzouq; Shreyas Saligram; Diego Lim; Amit Rastogi; John Bonino; Mojtaba Olyaee
Journal:  N Am J Med Sci       Date:  2016-01

4.  Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles.

Authors:  Jia-Ying Chen; Qing-Yu Ding; Yang Lv; Wen Guo; Fa-Chao Zhi; Si-De Liu; Tian-Ming Cheng
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2016-10-21       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 5.  An update on the role of advanced diagnostic bronchoscopy in the evaluation and staging of lung cancer.

Authors:  Adam R Belanger; Jason A Akulian
Journal:  Ther Adv Respir Dis       Date:  2017-03-08       Impact factor: 4.031

Review 6.  Role of Bronchoscopic Techniques in the Diagnosis of Thoracic Sarcoidosis.

Authors:  Cecília Pedro; Natália Melo; Hélder Novais E Bastos; Adriana Magalhães; Gabriela Fernandes; Natália Martins; António Morais; Patrícia Caetano Mota
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2019-08-28       Impact factor: 4.241

7.  Comparative diagnostic accuracy of EUS needles in solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Samuel Han; Furqan Bhullar; Omar Alaber; Ayesha Kamal; Puanani Hopson; Kavin Kanthasamy; Sarah Coughlin; Livia Archibugi; Nikhil Thiruvengadam; Christopher Moreau; David Jin; Pedram Paragomi; Francisco Valverde-López; Sajan Nagpal; Cemal Yazici; Georgios Papchristou; Peter J Lee; Venkata Akshintala
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2021-05-27

Review 8.  Efforts to improve the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for pancreatic tumors.

Authors:  Akane Yamabe; Atsushi Irisawa; Manoop S Bhutani; Goro Shibukawa; Mariko Fujisawa; Ai Sato; Yoshitsugu Yoshida; Noriyuki Arakawa; Tsunehiko Ikeda; Ryo Igarashi; Takumi Maki; Shogo Yamamoto
Journal:  Endosc Ultrasound       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.628

Review 9.  A comparison of the efficiency of 22G versus 25G needles in EUS-FNA for solid pancreatic mass assessment: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hugo Gonçalo Guedes; Diogo Turiani Hourneaux de Moura; Ralph Braga Duarte; Martin Andres Coronel Cordero; Marcos Eduardo Lera Dos Santos; Spencer Cheng; Sergio Eiji Matuguma; Dalton Marques Chaves; Wanderley Marques Bernardo; Eduardo Guimarães Hourneaux de Moura
Journal:  Clinics (Sao Paulo)       Date:  2018-02-15       Impact factor: 2.365

10.  Diagnostic accuracy of fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions guided by endoscopic ultrasound elastography.

Authors:  Antonio Facciorusso; Matteo Martina; Rosario Vincenzo Buccino; Maurizio Cosimo Nacchiero; Nicola Muscatiello
Journal:  Ann Gastroenterol       Date:  2018-05-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.