Literature DB >> 25098611

Core biopsy needle versus standard aspiration needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a randomized parallel-group study.

Yun Nah Lee1, Jong Ho Moon1, Hee Kyung Kim2, Hyun Jong Choi1, Moon Han Choi1, Dong Choon Kim1, Tae Hoon Lee1, Sang-Woo Cha1, Young Deok Cho1, Sang-Heum Park1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: An endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) device using a core biopsy needle was developed to improve diagnostic accuracy by simultaneously obtaining cytological aspirates and histological core samples. We prospectively compared the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB with standard EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in patients with solid pancreatic masses. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 2012 and May 2013, consecutive patients with solid pancreatic masses were prospectively enrolled and randomized to undergo EUS-FNB using a core biopsy needle or EUS-FNA using a standard aspiration needle at a single tertiary center. The specimen was analyzed by onsite cytology, Papanicolaou-stain cytology, and histology. The main outcome measure was diagnostic accuracy for malignancy. The secondary outcome measures were: the median number of passes required to establish a diagnosis, the proportion of patients in whom the diagnosis was established with each pass, and complication rates.
RESULTS: The overall accuracy of combining onsite cytology with Papanicolaou-stain cytology and histology was not significantly different for the FNB (n = 58) and FNA (n = 58) groups (98.3 % [95 %CI 94.9 % - 100 %] vs. 94.8 % [95 %CI 91.9 % - 100 %]; P = 0.671). Compared with FNA, FNB required a significantly lower median number of needle passes to establish a diagnosis (1.0 vs. 2.0; P < 0.001). On subgroup analysis of 111 patients with malignant lesions, the proportion of patients in whom malignancy was diagnosed on the first pass was significantly greater in the FNB group (72.7 % vs. 37.5 %; P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: The overall accuracy of FNB and FNA in patients with solid pancreatic masses was comparable; however, fewer passes were required to establish the diagnosis of malignancy using FNB.This study was registered on the UMIN Clinical Trial Registry (UMIN000014057). © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25098611     DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1377558

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Endoscopy        ISSN: 0013-726X            Impact factor:   10.093


  52 in total

1.  Comparison of 22G reverse-beveled versus standard needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic lesions.

Authors:  Abdullah Alatawi; Frédéric Beuvon; Sophie Grabar; Sarah Leblanc; Stanislas Chaussade; Benoit Terris; Maximilien Barret; Frédéric Prat
Journal:  United European Gastroenterol J       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 4.623

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.  US-guided core needle biopsy under assistance of hydrodissection to diagnose small lymph node metastases adjacent to cervical large vessels.

Authors:  Zhigang Cheng; Ping Liang
Journal:  Diagn Interv Radiol       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 2.630

4.  Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration Vs Fine-Needle Biopsy.

Authors:  V Raman Muthusamy
Journal:  Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y)       Date:  2017-08

5.  A Comparative Study of 22G versus 19G Needles for EUS-Guided Biopsies for Parenchymal Liver Disease: Are Thinner Needles Better?

Authors:  Harsh K Patel; Romil Saxena; Natalia Rush; Suchi K Patel; Chandra S Dasari; Wadad Mneimneh; Ariel Quickery; Mahmoud A Rahal; Lindsey Temnykh; John DeWitt; Mohammad Al-Haddad
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2020-03-03       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 6.  The evolution into personalized therapies in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: challenges and opportunities.

Authors:  Anteneh A Tesfaye; Mandana Kamgar; Asfar Azmi; Philip A Philip
Journal:  Expert Rev Anticancer Ther       Date:  2017-12-19       Impact factor: 4.512

Review 7.  The Impact of Recent Advances in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition on the Management of Pancreatic Cancer.

Authors:  Susana Marques; Miguel Bispo; Ricardo Rio-Tinto; Paulo Fidalgo; Jacques Devière
Journal:  GE Port J Gastroenterol       Date:  2020-10-23

8.  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

9.  The presence of rapid on-site evaluation did not increase the adequacy and diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition of solid pancreatic lesions with core needle.

Authors:  Carlo Fabbri; Lorenzo Fuccio; Adele Fornelli; Filippo Antonini; Rosa Liotta; Leonardo Frazzoni; Alberto Larghi; Antonella Maimone; Silvia Paggi; Paolo Gusella; Luca Barresi; Anna Maria Polifemo; Elio Iovine; Giampiero Macarri; Vincenzo Cennamo; Ilaria Tarantino
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-05-18       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  A Rare Pancreatic Tail Metastasis from Squamous Cell Lung Carcinoma Diagnosed by EUS-FNB and a Small Review of the Literature.

Authors:  Ioannis Stoupis; Evangelos Voudoukis; Emmanouil Mastorakis; Georgios Kazamias; Panagiotis Ieromonachou; Charalampos Pappas
Journal:  GE Port J Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-04-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.