Cargando…
Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition Versus Fine Needle Aspiration for Diagnosis of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma
Objectives: Compare the 22G needle versus EchoTip ProCore® 20 (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA) on their handling, specimen suitability, amount of tissue obtained, diagnostic performance, the possibility of immunohistochemistry, and rate of adverse events. Materials and methods: This is a retrosp...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Cureus
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10406500/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37554612 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.41576 |
_version_ | 1785085756854763520 |
---|---|
author | Omairi, Tarik W Micelli-Neto, Otavio Taglieri, Eloy de Araujo-Filho, Jessé C de Faria, Andressa Tomé R Goldman, Suzan M Surjan, Rodrigo Cañada T Machado, Marcel A Venco, Filadélfio E Ardengh, José C |
author_facet | Omairi, Tarik W Micelli-Neto, Otavio Taglieri, Eloy de Araujo-Filho, Jessé C de Faria, Andressa Tomé R Goldman, Suzan M Surjan, Rodrigo Cañada T Machado, Marcel A Venco, Filadélfio E Ardengh, José C |
author_sort | Omairi, Tarik W |
collection | PubMed |
description | Objectives: Compare the 22G needle versus EchoTip ProCore® 20 (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA) on their handling, specimen suitability, amount of tissue obtained, diagnostic performance, the possibility of immunohistochemistry, and rate of adverse events. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective, comparative study of consecutively examined patients with pancreatic masses who underwent endosonography-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) via the 22G needle, and endosonography-guided tissue acquisition (TA) via ProCore 20 (PC20). The operator evaluated needle insertion and subjectively classified the specimen. The pathologist measured the samples, classified the amount of tissue, and determined the influence of bleeding on the interpretation. Results: A total of 129 patients participated in the study, out of whom 52 underwent endosonography-guided FNA with 22G and 77 underwent endosonography-guided TA with a PC20 needle. Malignant lesions were found in 106, and 23 had benign lesions. The duodenal route was used in 62% of patients. The 22G needle was easier to introduce (p=0.0495). However, PC20 obtained a larger amount (p<0.01) with fewer punctures (p<0.001). The PC20 also yielded a larger average microcore diameter (p=0.0032). Microhistology was adequate for 22G and PC20 in 22 (42.2%) and 50 (78.1%) specimens, respectively (p<0.001). Bleeding was not significantly different (p>0.999). Immunohistochemistry was possible in 36 (69.2%) and 40 (51.9%) specimens obtained by 22G and PC20, respectively (p=0.075). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of 22G were 93.5%, 100%, 100%, 66.7%, and 94.2%, respectively; and for PC20, it was 95%, 100%, 100%, 85%, and 96.1%, respectively. Mild bleeding was the most common early adverse event, occurring in 2/52 (3.8%) 22G and 4/77 (5.2%) PC20 cases (p>0.05). Conclusions: The PC20 required fewer punctures and reduced the need for immunohistochemistry as it yielded better and larger microcores. Its ease of insertion into the target lesion makes it a good option to obtain satisfactory microcore specimens in difficult positions, such as the transduodenal route. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10406500 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Cureus |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-104065002023-08-08 Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition Versus Fine Needle Aspiration for Diagnosis of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Omairi, Tarik W Micelli-Neto, Otavio Taglieri, Eloy de Araujo-Filho, Jessé C de Faria, Andressa Tomé R Goldman, Suzan M Surjan, Rodrigo Cañada T Machado, Marcel A Venco, Filadélfio E Ardengh, José C Cureus Gastroenterology Objectives: Compare the 22G needle versus EchoTip ProCore® 20 (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA) on their handling, specimen suitability, amount of tissue obtained, diagnostic performance, the possibility of immunohistochemistry, and rate of adverse events. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective, comparative study of consecutively examined patients with pancreatic masses who underwent endosonography-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) via the 22G needle, and endosonography-guided tissue acquisition (TA) via ProCore 20 (PC20). The operator evaluated needle insertion and subjectively classified the specimen. The pathologist measured the samples, classified the amount of tissue, and determined the influence of bleeding on the interpretation. Results: A total of 129 patients participated in the study, out of whom 52 underwent endosonography-guided FNA with 22G and 77 underwent endosonography-guided TA with a PC20 needle. Malignant lesions were found in 106, and 23 had benign lesions. The duodenal route was used in 62% of patients. The 22G needle was easier to introduce (p=0.0495). However, PC20 obtained a larger amount (p<0.01) with fewer punctures (p<0.001). The PC20 also yielded a larger average microcore diameter (p=0.0032). Microhistology was adequate for 22G and PC20 in 22 (42.2%) and 50 (78.1%) specimens, respectively (p<0.001). Bleeding was not significantly different (p>0.999). Immunohistochemistry was possible in 36 (69.2%) and 40 (51.9%) specimens obtained by 22G and PC20, respectively (p=0.075). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of 22G were 93.5%, 100%, 100%, 66.7%, and 94.2%, respectively; and for PC20, it was 95%, 100%, 100%, 85%, and 96.1%, respectively. Mild bleeding was the most common early adverse event, occurring in 2/52 (3.8%) 22G and 4/77 (5.2%) PC20 cases (p>0.05). Conclusions: The PC20 required fewer punctures and reduced the need for immunohistochemistry as it yielded better and larger microcores. Its ease of insertion into the target lesion makes it a good option to obtain satisfactory microcore specimens in difficult positions, such as the transduodenal route. Cureus 2023-07-08 /pmc/articles/PMC10406500/ /pubmed/37554612 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.41576 Text en Copyright © 2023, Omairi et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Gastroenterology Omairi, Tarik W Micelli-Neto, Otavio Taglieri, Eloy de Araujo-Filho, Jessé C de Faria, Andressa Tomé R Goldman, Suzan M Surjan, Rodrigo Cañada T Machado, Marcel A Venco, Filadélfio E Ardengh, José C Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition Versus Fine Needle Aspiration for Diagnosis of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma |
title | Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition Versus Fine Needle Aspiration for Diagnosis of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma |
title_full | Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition Versus Fine Needle Aspiration for Diagnosis of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma |
title_fullStr | Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition Versus Fine Needle Aspiration for Diagnosis of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma |
title_full_unstemmed | Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition Versus Fine Needle Aspiration for Diagnosis of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma |
title_short | Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition Versus Fine Needle Aspiration for Diagnosis of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma |
title_sort | endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition versus fine needle aspiration for diagnosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma |
topic | Gastroenterology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10406500/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37554612 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.41576 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT omairitarikw endoscopicultrasoundguidedtissueacquisitionversusfineneedleaspirationfordiagnosisofpancreaticductaladenocarcinoma AT micellinetootavio endoscopicultrasoundguidedtissueacquisitionversusfineneedleaspirationfordiagnosisofpancreaticductaladenocarcinoma AT taglierieloy endoscopicultrasoundguidedtissueacquisitionversusfineneedleaspirationfordiagnosisofpancreaticductaladenocarcinoma AT dearaujofilhojessec endoscopicultrasoundguidedtissueacquisitionversusfineneedleaspirationfordiagnosisofpancreaticductaladenocarcinoma AT defariaandressatomer endoscopicultrasoundguidedtissueacquisitionversusfineneedleaspirationfordiagnosisofpancreaticductaladenocarcinoma AT goldmansuzanm endoscopicultrasoundguidedtissueacquisitionversusfineneedleaspirationfordiagnosisofpancreaticductaladenocarcinoma AT surjanrodrigocanadat endoscopicultrasoundguidedtissueacquisitionversusfineneedleaspirationfordiagnosisofpancreaticductaladenocarcinoma AT machadomarcela endoscopicultrasoundguidedtissueacquisitionversusfineneedleaspirationfordiagnosisofpancreaticductaladenocarcinoma AT vencofiladelfioe endoscopicultrasoundguidedtissueacquisitionversusfineneedleaspirationfordiagnosisofpancreaticductaladenocarcinoma AT ardenghjosec endoscopicultrasoundguidedtissueacquisitionversusfineneedleaspirationfordiagnosisofpancreaticductaladenocarcinoma |