Endoscopic ultrasound with combined fine needle aspiration plus biopsy improves diagnostic yield in solid pancreatic masses

被引:3
作者
Gonzalez, Adalberto [1 ]
Wadhwa, Vaibhav [2 ]
Singh, Harjinder [1 ]
Khan, Sikandar [3 ]
Gupta, Kapil [4 ]
Liang, Hong [1 ]
Hussain, Ishtiaq [1 ]
Vargo, John [5 ]
Jang, Sunguk [5 ]
Chahal, Prabhleen [5 ]
Bhatt, Amit [5 ]
Siddiki, Hassan [5 ]
Erim, Tolga [1 ]
Sanaka, Madhusudhan R. [5 ]
机构
[1] Cleveland Clin Florida, Dept Gastroenterol & Hepatol, Weston, FL USA
[2] Harvard Med Sch, Beth Israel Deaconess Med Ctr, Ctr Adv Endoscopy, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[3] Cleveland Clin Florida, Dept Internal Med, Weston, FL USA
[4] Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Med Sch, Dept Gastroenterol & Hepatol, New Brunswick, NJ USA
[5] Cleveland Clin, Dept Gastroenterol Hepatol & Nutr, Cleveland, OH 44195 USA
关键词
Endoscopic ultrasound; fine needle aspiration; fine needle biopsy; pancreatic cancer; diagnostic yield; EUS-FNA; ACCURACY; TRIAL;
D O I
10.1080/00365521.2021.2024249
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Goals Our aim was to compare the diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) versus combined fine needle aspiration and fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNA + FNB) in the evaluation of solid pancreatic masses (SPMs). Background EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB are established methods to diagnose SPMs. No studies have evaluated the efficacy of combination of both (EUS-FNA + FNB). Our senior author (MRS) hypothesized that combining the two techniques by using a single FNB needle improves diagnostic yield and started combination technique in October 2016. Study Patients who underwent EUS for SPMs by MRS during January 2014-September 2019 were included. They were divided into the EUS-FNA group and EUS-FNA + FNB group. EUS-FNA was performed using a 22 or 25 gauge Expect Slimline needle (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA) and EUS-FNA + FNB was performed using a single 22 or 25 gauge Shark-core needle (Medtronics, Minneapolis, MN, USA). Our primary outcome was to compare the diagnostic yield in the two groups. Results Among 105 patients included, 58 were in the EUS-FNA group and 47 were in the EUS-FNA + FNB group. EUS-FNA + FNB group had significantly higher diagnostic yield and required fewer needle passes compared to EUS-FNA group, 95.7% vs. 77.6%, p = .01: and 4 vs. 5, p = .002; respectively. Procedural duration was similar in both groups but the combined technique required less number of needles per procedure. There was no difference in adverse events in the two groups. Conclusion Our study showed that combined EUS-FNA + FNB had higher diagnostic yield compared to EUS-FNA in SPMs along with less number of needle passes and needles required. Further prospective studies are needed to validate these findings and cost-effectiveness of this strategy.
引用
收藏
页码:610 / 617
页数:8
相关论文
共 23 条
[1]   A randomized controlled cross-over trial and cost analysis comparing endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration and fine needle biopsy [J].
Aadam, A. Aziz ;
Wani, Sachin ;
Amick, Ashley ;
Shah, Janak N. ;
Bhat, Yasser M. ;
Hamerski, Christopher M. ;
Klapman, Jason B. ;
Muthusamy, V. Raman ;
Watson, Rabindra R. ;
Rademaker, Alfred W. ;
Keswani, Rajesh N. ;
Keefer, Laurie ;
Das, Ananya ;
Komanduri, Srinadh .
ENDOSCOPY INTERNATIONAL OPEN, 2016, 4 (05) :E497-E505
[2]   Comparison of 22G reverse-beveled versus standard needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic lesions [J].
Alatawi, Abdullah ;
Beuvon, Frederic ;
Grabar, Sophie ;
Leblanc, Sarah ;
Chaussade, Stanislas ;
Terris, Benoit ;
Barret, Maximilien ;
Prat, Frederic .
UNITED EUROPEAN GASTROENTEROLOGY JOURNAL, 2015, 3 (04) :343-352
[3]   Does onsite cytotechnology evaluation improve the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy? [J].
Alsohaibani, Fahad ;
Girgis, Safwat ;
Sandha, Gurpal Singh .
CANADIAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2009, 23 (01) :26-30
[4]   Randomized trial comparing the 22-gauge aspiration and 22-gauge biopsy needles for EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic mass lesions [J].
Bang, Ji Young ;
Hebert-Magee, Shantel ;
Trevino, Jessica ;
Ramesh, Jayapal ;
Varadarajulu, Shyam .
GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2012, 76 (02) :321-327
[5]   The no endosonographic detection of tumor (NEST) study: A case series of pancreatic cancers missed on endoscopic ultrasonography [J].
Bhutani, MS ;
Gress, FG ;
Giovannini, M ;
Erickson, RA ;
Catalano, MF ;
Chak, A ;
Deprez, PH ;
Faigel, DO ;
Nguyen, CC .
ENDOSCOPY, 2004, 36 (05) :385-389
[6]   Analysis of Fine-Needle Biopsy vs Fine-Needle Aspiration in Diagnosis of Pancreatic and Abdominal Masses: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial [J].
Cheng, Bin ;
Zhang, Yueming ;
Chen, Qian ;
Sun, Bo ;
Deng, Zhuang ;
Shan, Hongbo ;
Dou, Lizhou ;
Wang, Jinglin ;
Li, Yawen ;
Yang, Xiujiang ;
Jiang, Tianan ;
Xu, Guoliang ;
Wang, Guiqi .
CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2018, 16 (08) :1314-1321
[7]  
Early, 2013, GASTROINTEST ENDOSC, V77, P1429
[8]   Yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy in patients with suspected pancreatic carcinoma - Emphasis on atypical, suspicious, and false-negative aspirates [J].
Eloubeidi, MA ;
Jhala, D ;
Chhieng, DC ;
Chen, VK ;
Eltoum, I ;
Vickers, S ;
Wilcox, CM ;
Jhala, N .
CANCER CYTOPATHOLOGY, 2003, 99 (05) :285-292
[9]   Factors predicting the number of EUS-guided fine-needle passes for diagnosis of pancreatic malignancies [J].
Erickson, RA ;
Sayage-Rabie, L ;
Beissner, RS .
GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2000, 51 (02) :184-190
[10]  
Frampas E, 2013, Diagn Interv Imaging, V94, P741, DOI 10.1016/j.diii.2013.03.013