Literature DB >> 32526235

Randomized controlled trial comparing the Franseen needle with the Fork-tip needle for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy.

Munish Ashat1, Jagpal S Klair1, Sydney L Rooney2, Sagar J Vishal2, Chris Jensen2, Nadav Sahar1, Arvind R Murali1, Rami El-Abiad1, Henning Gerke1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS-guided FNA primarily provides cytologic samples. EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (FNB) with needles that provide histologic specimens may enhance diagnostic yield and facilitate accessory tissue staining. Several different needle designs are currently available and design superiority is unknown. We designed a randomized controlled trial to compare 2 commonly used EUS-FNB needles in their ability to provide histologic tissue samples (primary endpoint) and to reach an accurate diagnosis (secondary endpoint).
METHODS: A total of 150 lesions from 134 patients (November 2018 to June 2019) were randomized 1:1 between biopsy with a Franseen needle and a Fork-tip needle. The groups were compared regarding the quality of the tissue samples and diagnostic accuracy.
RESULTS: Of 150 lesions, 75 were pancreatic and 75 were other solid lesions in and around the GI tract. There was no statistically significant difference between the Franseen needle and the Fork-tip needle in the yield of adequate histologic samples, 71 of 75 (94.7%) versus 72 of 75 (96%), (P = 1.00), an absolute difference of -1.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], -8.1% to 5.4%). The 2 groups were similar in the diagnostic accuracy of histologic analysis, 64 of 75 (85.3%) versus 68 of 75 (90.7%) (P = .45), absolute difference -5.4% (95% CI, -15.7% to 5%); and in the diagnostic accuracy of combined cytologic and histologic analysis, 65 of 75 (86.7%) versus 69 of 75 (92%) (P = .43), absolute difference -5.3% (95% CI, -15.2% to 4.5%).
CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in the performance of the Franseen needle versus the Fork-tip needle. Both needles achieved a high yield of histologic tissue samples and high diagnostic accuracy. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03672032.).
Copyright © 2021 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32526235     DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.05.057

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  3 in total

1.  A Pilot Randomized Crossover Trial of Wet Suction and Conventional Techniques of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration for Upper Gastrointestinal Subepithelial Lesions.

Authors:  Mika Takasumi; Takuto Hikichi; Minami Hashimoto; Jun Nakamura; Tsunetaka Kato; Hitomi Kikuchi; Yuichi Waragai; Ko Watanabe; Tadayuki Takagi; Rei Suzuki; Mitsuru Sugimoto; Manabu Hayashi; Yuki Sato; Hiroki Irie; Ryoichiro Kobashi; Yoshinori Okubo; Masao Kobayakawa; Hiromasa Ohira
Journal:  Gastroenterol Res Pract       Date:  2021-03-22       Impact factor: 2.260

2.  Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy Using 22G Franseen Needles without Rapid On-Site Evaluation for Diagnosis of Intraabdominal Masses.

Authors:  Nonthalee Pausawasdi; Kunsuda Cheirsilpa; Wipapat Chalermwai; Ishan Asokan; Tassanee Sriprayoon; Phunchai Charatcharoenwitthaya
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-02-17       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 3.  The Utility of Endoscopic-Ultrasonography-Guided Tissue Acquisition for Solid Pancreatic Lesions.

Authors:  Hiroki Tanaka; Shimpei Matsusaki
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-19
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.