An experimental study to assess the best maneuver when using a reverse side-bevel histology needle for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy

被引:5
作者
Yamabe, Akane [1 ]
Irisawa, Atsushi [1 ]
Shibukawa, Goro [1 ]
Hoshi, Koki [1 ]
Fujisawa, Mariko [1 ]
Igarashi, Ryo [1 ]
Abe, Yoko [1 ]
Imbe, Koh [1 ]
机构
[1] Fukushima Med Univ, Dept Gastroenterol, Aizu Med Ctr, Arzuwakamazu, Japan
关键词
D O I
10.1055/s-0041-107801
中图分类号
R57 [消化系及腹部疾病];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and study aims: Recently, ProCore was developed as an endoscopy ultrasound (EUS)-guided histology needle designed to address several current limitations of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA). Nevertheless, tissue yield with the ProCore is not consistent. No standard technique has been established. This experimental study was conducted to ascertain the best maneuver when using the ProCore. Patients and methods: We performed fine-needle aspiration and biopsy (FNAB) with a 22-gauge (G) ProCore using chicken tenderloin and liver. Six methods were used, with two needle movement techniques (natural speed and whipping back) and three negative pressures (no suction (NS), slow pull (SP), and 10-mL suction). Results: In cases using the natural speed technique, a significant difference in tissue yield was found with suction pressures in both tenderloin and liver (P<0.0001, P=0.0079). In cases using the whipping back technique, for the tenderloin, no significant difference in tissue yield was found for NS vs. SP (P=0.0596), however, a significant difference was found for SP vs. 10-mL suction (P<0.0001) and for NS vs. 10-mL suction (P<0.0001). For the liver, a significant difference was found among suction pressures (P=0.0079). Comparing natural speed with whipping back using the tenderloin, no significant difference in tissue yield was found with NS and 10mL of pressure (P=0.1126, P=0.0718), but a significant difference was found with SP (P=0.0028). Regarding the liver, no significant difference was found based upon suction pressure (NS P=0.1508; SP P=0.0873; 10mL P=0.6667). Conclusions: EUS-FNAB using ProCore can be performed with negative pressure with any needling technique. Although ProCore has a reverse side-bevel, results in using it with a whipping-back technique were inconclusive.
引用
收藏
页码:E56 / E61
页数:6
相关论文
共 22 条
  • [11] EUS-guided trucut biopsy in establishing autoimmune pancreatitis as the cause of obstructive jaundice
    Levy, MJ
    Reddy, RP
    Wiersema, MJ
    Smyrk, TC
    Clain, JE
    Harewood, GC
    Pearson, RK
    Rajan, E
    Topazian, MD
    Yusuf, TE
    Chari, ST
    Petersen, BT
    [J]. GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2005, 61 (03) : 467 - 472
  • [12] Slow Pull Versus Suction in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration of Pancreatic Solid Masses
    Nakai, Yousuke
    Isayama, Hiroyuki
    Chang, Kenneth J.
    Yamamoto, Natsuyo
    Hamada, Tsuyoshi
    Uchino, Rie
    Mizuno, Suguru
    Miyabayashi, Koji
    Yamamoto, Keisuke
    Kawakubo, Kazumichi
    Kogure, Hirofumi
    Sasaki, Takashi
    Hirano, Kenji
    Tanaka, Mariko
    Tada, Minoru
    Fukayama, Masashi
    Koike, Kazuhiko
    [J]. DIGESTIVE DISEASES AND SCIENCES, 2014, 59 (07) : 1578 - 1585
  • [13] A comparison of the diagnostic yield and specimen adequacy between 22 and 25 gauge needles for endoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of solid pancreatic lesions (SPL): Is bigger better?
    Nguyen, Thomas Thong H.
    Lee, Christopher E.
    Whang, Charles S.
    Ashida, Reiko
    Lee, John G.
    Chang, Kenneth
    Muthusamy, Raman
    [J]. GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2008, 67 (05) : AB100 - AB100
  • [14] EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses: a prospective, randomized trial comparing 22-gauge and 25-gauge needles
    Siddiqui, Uzma D.
    Rossi, Federico
    Rosenthal, Lawrence S.
    Padda, Manmeet S.
    Murali-Dharan, Visvanathan
    Aslanian, Harry R.
    [J]. GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2009, 70 (06) : 1093 - 1097
  • [15] EUS-Guided 22-Gauge Fine-Needle Aspiration Versus Core Biopsy Needle in the Evaluation of Solid Pancreatic Neoplasms
    Strand, Daniel S.
    Jeffus, Susanne K.
    Sauer, Bryan G.
    Wang, Andrew Y.
    Stelow, Edward B.
    Shami, Vanessa M.
    [J]. DIAGNOSTIC CYTOPATHOLOGY, 2014, 42 (09) : 751 - 758
  • [16] Efficacy, Safety, and Predictive Factors for a Positive Yield of EUS-Guided Trucut Biopsy: A Large Tertiary Referral Center Experience
    Thomas, Titus
    Kaye, Phillip V.
    Ragunath, Krish
    Aithal, Guruprasad
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2009, 104 (03) : 584 - 591
  • [17] Comparison of EUS-guided 19-gauge Trucut needle biopsy with EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration
    Varadarajulu, S
    Fraig, M
    Schmulewitz, N
    Roberts, S
    Wildi, S
    Hawes, RH
    Hoffman, BJ
    Wallace, MB
    [J]. ENDOSCOPY, 2004, 36 (05) : 397 - 401
  • [18] Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition
    Varadarajulu, Shyam
    Hasan, Muhammad K.
    Bang, Ji Young
    Hebert-Magee, Shantel
    Hawes, Robert H.
    [J]. DIGESTIVE ENDOSCOPY, 2014, 26 : 62 - 69
  • [19] Comparative study of diagnostic value of cytologic sampling by endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration and that by endoscopic retrograde pancreatography for the management of pancreatic mass without biliary stricture
    Wakatsuki, T
    Irisawa, A
    Bhutani, MS
    Hikichi, T
    Shibukawa, G
    Takagi, T
    Yamamoto, G
    Takahashi, Y
    Yamada, Y
    Watanabe, K
    Obara, K
    Suzuki, T
    Sato, Y
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY, 2005, 20 (11) : 1707 - 1711
  • [20] Endosonography-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy: Diagnostic accuracy and complication assessment
    Wiersema, MJ
    Vilmann, P
    Giovannini, M
    Chang, KJ
    Wiersema, LM
    [J]. GASTROENTEROLOGY, 1997, 112 (04) : 1087 - 1095