共 16 条
A prospective, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial of EUS-guided FNA with and without a stylet
被引:72
作者:
Rastogi, Amit
[1
]
Wani, Sachin
[1
]
Gupta, Neil
[1
]
Singh, Vikas
[1
]
Gaddam, Srinivas
[1
]
Reddymasu, Savio
[1
]
Ulusarac, Ozlem
[1
]
Fan, Fang
[1
]
Romanas, Maria
[1
]
Dennis, Katie L.
Sharma, Prateek
[1
]
Bansal, Ajay
[1
]
Oropeza-Vail, Melissa
[1
]
Olyaee, Mojtaba
[1
]
机构:
[1] Univ Kansas, Sch Med, Vet Affairs Med Ctr, Kansas City, MO 64128 USA
关键词:
FINE-NEEDLE-ASPIRATION;
D O I:
10.1016/j.gie.2011.02.015
中图分类号:
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号:
摘要:
Background: Most endosonographers use an EUS needle with an internal stylet during EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA). Reinserting the stylet into the needle after every pass is tedious and time-consuming, and there are no data to suggest that it improves the quality of the cytology specimen. Objective: To compare the samples obtained by EUS-FNA with and without a stylet for (1) the degree of cellularity, adequacy, contamination, and amount of blood and (2) the diagnostic yield of malignancy. Design: Prospective,single-blind, randomized, controlled trial. Setting: Two tertiary care referral centers. Patients: Patients referred for EUS-FNA of solid lesions. Intervention: Patients underwent EUS-FNA of the solid lesions, and 2 passes each were made with a stylet and without a stylet in the needle. The order of the passes was randomized, and the cytopathologists reviewing the slides were blinded to the stylet status of passes. Main Outcome Measurements: Degree of cellularity, adequacy, contamination, amount of blood, and the diagnostic yield of malignancy in the specimens. Results: A total of 101 patients with 118 lesions were included in final analysis; 236 FNA passes were made, each with and without a stylet. No significant differences were seen in the cellularity (P = .98), adequacy of the specimen (P = .26), contamination (P = .92), or significant amount of blood (P = .61) between specimens obtained with and without a stylet. The diagnostic yield of malignancy was 55 of 236 specimens (23%) in the with-stylet group compared with 66 of 236 specimens (28%) in the without-stylet group (P = .29). Limitations: Endosonographers were not blinded to the stylet status of the passes. Conclusions: Using a stylet during EUS-FNA does not confer any significant advantage with regard to the quality of the specimen obtained or the diagnostic yield of malignancy. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT 01213290). (Gastrointest Endosc 2011;74:58-64.)
引用
收藏
页码:58 / 64
页数:7
相关论文