Stylet slow-pull vs. standard suction technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy in pancreatic solid lesions using 20 Gauge Procore™ needle: A multicenter randomized trial
| Autor: | Daniela Scimeca, Elettra Unti, Elisabetta Conte, Filippo Antonini, Filippo Mocciaro, Roberto Di Mitri, Alberto Larghi, Cecilia Binda, Nunzia Scibetta, A. Bonaccorso, Adele Fornelli, Carlo Fabbri, Sara Giorgini, Giampiero Macarri |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2020 |
| Předmět: |
Male
Suction (medicine) Endoscopic ultrasound Blood contamination Suction Sensitivity and Specificity Likelihood ratios in diagnostic testing Fine needle biopsy law.invention 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Randomized controlled trial law Humans Medicine Prospective Studies Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration Aged Aged 80 and over Hepatology medicine.diagnostic_test business.industry Gastroenterology Middle Aged Stylet Pancreatic Neoplasms Neuroendocrine Tumors Fine-needle aspiration Needles 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis Female 030211 gastroenterology & hepatology business Nuclear medicine |
| Zdroj: | Digestive and Liver Disease. 52:178-184 |
| ISSN: | 1590-8658 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.dld.2019.08.023 |
| Popis: | Background Standard suction and slow-pull techniques have been utilized during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions, but the correct sampling technique remains unclear. New needles designed to obtain samples suitable for histological evaluation have become available. We performed a study comparing the two sampling methods during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) in patients with pancreatic solid lesions. Methods We performed EUS-FNB with a 20 Gauge FNB needle using slow-pull or standard suction techniques in a prospective, randomized, multicenter study. The primary aim was bloodiness of the collected specimens. Secondary aims were technical success and performance of the two techniques. Results 110 patients were included (55 per group). No difference in blood contamination was observed (slow-pull 80% vs. suction 74%, p = 0.917). Technical success was 95% (96% vs. 94%, p = 0315). Sensitivity (96% vs. 93%), specificity (100% vs. 100%), positive likelihood ratio (NA), negative likelihood ratio (0.04 vs. 0.07), diagnostic accuracy (96 vs. 93%) did not differ between the two groups. Conclusion EUS-FNB with slow-pull and standard suction techniques are comparable in terms of blood contamination providing similar high diagnostic sensitivity and accuracy in pancreatic solid lesions. The use of the new generation FNB needle allows to reach such high level of diagnostic adequacy regardless of the technique utilized. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full Text from ScienceDirect