Cargando…

EUS-FNA using 22G nitinol or ProCore needles without on-site cytopathology

OBJECTIVES: The project is aimed to compare the tissue sampling rate and the diagnostic accuracy rate of EUS-FNA using 22G nitinol and reverse bevel-tipped needles. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, crossover study in a tertiary academic hospital. All consecutive adult patien...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chong, Charing Ching Ning, Teoh, Anthony Yuen Bun, Tang, Raymond Shing Yan, Chan, Anthony Wing Hung, Ng, Enders Kwok Wai, Lai, Paul Bo San
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5838729/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29451170
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/eus.eus_113_17
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: The project is aimed to compare the tissue sampling rate and the diagnostic accuracy rate of EUS-FNA using 22G nitinol and reverse bevel-tipped needles. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, crossover study in a tertiary academic hospital. All consecutive adult patients undergoing EUS-guided FNA for lesions > 2 cm were recruited. Patients fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria underwent EUS-guided FNA using both needles in sequence. They were randomized on a 1:1 basis to determine whether EUS-FNA would be performed first using the 22G reverse bevel-tipped (ProCore) needle followed by the nitinol needle or vice versa. The patients and the pathologists were blinded to the type of needle used. RESULTS: Forty patients with suspected malignant neoplasms were recruited to the study. No significant differences were found in the diagnostic yield (76.9% vs. 84.6%, P = 0.389), accuracy (71.8% vs. 84.6%, P = 0.170), sensitivity (77.8% vs. 86.1%, P = 0.358), specificity (100% vs. 100%, P = 1), positive predictive value (100% vs. 100%, P = 1), and negative predictive value (20.0% vs. 28.6%, P = 1). The percentage of obtained tissue for histological assessment was also similar (41.0% vs. 46.2%, P = 0.648). In terms of the quantity of tissue obtained with the needles, a larger proportion of patients in the nitinol group obtained more tissue for assessment (P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: The tissue-sampling rate and the diagnostic accuracy of the new 22G ProCore needle were comparable to the conventional 22G FNA needle in the absence of an on-site cytopathologist.