Cargando…

Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles

AIM: To evaluate the cytological diagnostic capacity and sample quality of the slow-pull technique and compare them with different suction techniques. METHODS: From July 2010 to December 2015, 102 patients with pancreatic solid lesions who underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiratio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chen, Jia-Ying, Ding, Qing-Yu, Lv, Yang, Guo, Wen, Zhi, Fa-Chao, Liu, Si-De, Cheng, Tian-Ming
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5075553/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27818594
http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v22.i39.8790
_version_ 1782461882195509248
author Chen, Jia-Ying
Ding, Qing-Yu
Lv, Yang
Guo, Wen
Zhi, Fa-Chao
Liu, Si-De
Cheng, Tian-Ming
author_facet Chen, Jia-Ying
Ding, Qing-Yu
Lv, Yang
Guo, Wen
Zhi, Fa-Chao
Liu, Si-De
Cheng, Tian-Ming
author_sort Chen, Jia-Ying
collection PubMed
description AIM: To evaluate the cytological diagnostic capacity and sample quality of the slow-pull technique and compare them with different suction techniques. METHODS: From July 2010 to December 2015, 102 patients with pancreatic solid lesions who underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) with 22-gauge needles were retrospectively evaluated. EUS-FNA diagnosis was based on a cytological examination, and final diagnosis was based on a comprehensive standard of cytological diagnosis, surgical pathology and clinical or imaging follow-up. Cytological specimens were characterized for cellularity and blood contamination. The cytological diagnostic capacity and sample quality of the slow-pull technique and suction techniques with 5-mL/10-mL/20-mL syringes were analyzed. RESULTS: Of all of the EUS-FNA procedures, the slow-pull technique and suction techniques with 5-mL/10-mL/20-mL syringes were used in 31, 19, 34 and 18 procedures, respectively. There were significant differences between these four suction techniques in terms of cytological diagnostic accuracy (90.3% vs 63.2% vs 58.8% vs 55.6%, P = 0.019), sensitivity (88.2% vs 41.7% vs 40.0% vs 36.4%, P = 0.009) and blood contamination (score ≥ 2 for 29.0% vs 52.6% vs 70.6% vs 72.2%, P = 0.003). The accuracy and sensitivity of the slow-pull technique were significantly higher than those of the suction techniques using 5-mL (P = 0.03, P = 0.014), 10-mL (P = 0.005; P = 0.006) and 20-mL syringes (P = 0.01, P = 0.01). Blood contamination was significantly lower in the slow-pull technique than in the suction techniques with 10-mL (P = 0.001) and 20-mL syringes (P = 0.007). CONCLUSION: The slow-pull technique may increase the cytological diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity with slight blood contamination during EUS-FNA when using 22-gauge needles for solid pancreatic masses.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5075553
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Baishideng Publishing Group Inc
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50755532016-11-04 Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles Chen, Jia-Ying Ding, Qing-Yu Lv, Yang Guo, Wen Zhi, Fa-Chao Liu, Si-De Cheng, Tian-Ming World J Gastroenterol Retrospective Study AIM: To evaluate the cytological diagnostic capacity and sample quality of the slow-pull technique and compare them with different suction techniques. METHODS: From July 2010 to December 2015, 102 patients with pancreatic solid lesions who underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) with 22-gauge needles were retrospectively evaluated. EUS-FNA diagnosis was based on a cytological examination, and final diagnosis was based on a comprehensive standard of cytological diagnosis, surgical pathology and clinical or imaging follow-up. Cytological specimens were characterized for cellularity and blood contamination. The cytological diagnostic capacity and sample quality of the slow-pull technique and suction techniques with 5-mL/10-mL/20-mL syringes were analyzed. RESULTS: Of all of the EUS-FNA procedures, the slow-pull technique and suction techniques with 5-mL/10-mL/20-mL syringes were used in 31, 19, 34 and 18 procedures, respectively. There were significant differences between these four suction techniques in terms of cytological diagnostic accuracy (90.3% vs 63.2% vs 58.8% vs 55.6%, P = 0.019), sensitivity (88.2% vs 41.7% vs 40.0% vs 36.4%, P = 0.009) and blood contamination (score ≥ 2 for 29.0% vs 52.6% vs 70.6% vs 72.2%, P = 0.003). The accuracy and sensitivity of the slow-pull technique were significantly higher than those of the suction techniques using 5-mL (P = 0.03, P = 0.014), 10-mL (P = 0.005; P = 0.006) and 20-mL syringes (P = 0.01, P = 0.01). Blood contamination was significantly lower in the slow-pull technique than in the suction techniques with 10-mL (P = 0.001) and 20-mL syringes (P = 0.007). CONCLUSION: The slow-pull technique may increase the cytological diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity with slight blood contamination during EUS-FNA when using 22-gauge needles for solid pancreatic masses. Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2016-10-21 2016-10-21 /pmc/articles/PMC5075553/ /pubmed/27818594 http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v22.i39.8790 Text en ©The Author(s) 2016. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial.
spellingShingle Retrospective Study
Chen, Jia-Ying
Ding, Qing-Yu
Lv, Yang
Guo, Wen
Zhi, Fa-Chao
Liu, Si-De
Cheng, Tian-Ming
Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles
title Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles
title_full Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles
title_fullStr Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles
title_full_unstemmed Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles
title_short Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles
title_sort slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles
topic Retrospective Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5075553/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27818594
http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v22.i39.8790
work_keys_str_mv AT chenjiaying slowpullanddifferentconventionalsuctiontechniquesinendoscopicultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationofpancreaticsolidlesionsusing22gaugeneedles
AT dingqingyu slowpullanddifferentconventionalsuctiontechniquesinendoscopicultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationofpancreaticsolidlesionsusing22gaugeneedles
AT lvyang slowpullanddifferentconventionalsuctiontechniquesinendoscopicultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationofpancreaticsolidlesionsusing22gaugeneedles
AT guowen slowpullanddifferentconventionalsuctiontechniquesinendoscopicultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationofpancreaticsolidlesionsusing22gaugeneedles
AT zhifachao slowpullanddifferentconventionalsuctiontechniquesinendoscopicultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationofpancreaticsolidlesionsusing22gaugeneedles
AT liuside slowpullanddifferentconventionalsuctiontechniquesinendoscopicultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationofpancreaticsolidlesionsusing22gaugeneedles
AT chengtianming slowpullanddifferentconventionalsuctiontechniquesinendoscopicultrasoundguidedfineneedleaspirationofpancreaticsolidlesionsusing22gaugeneedles