• Endoscopy · Dec 2014

    Randomized Controlled Trial Observational Study

    Core biopsy needle versus standard aspiration needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a randomized parallel-group study.

    • Yun Nah Lee, Jong Ho Moon, Hee Kyung Kim, Hyun Jong Choi, Moon Han Choi, Dong Choon Kim, Tae Hoon Lee, Sang-Woo Cha, Young Deok Cho, and Sang-Heum Park.
    • Digestive Disease Center and Research Institute, Department of Internal Medicine, SoonChunHyang University School of Medicine, Bucheon and Seoul, Korea.
    • Endoscopy. 2014 Dec 1; 46 (12): 1056-62.

    Background And Study AimsAn endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) device using a core biopsy needle was developed to improve diagnostic accuracy by simultaneously obtaining cytological aspirates and histological core samples. We prospectively compared the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB with standard EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in patients with solid pancreatic masses.Patients And MethodsBetween January 2012 and May 2013, consecutive patients with solid pancreatic masses were prospectively enrolled and randomized to undergo EUS-FNB using a core biopsy needle or EUS-FNA using a standard aspiration needle at a single tertiary center. The specimen was analyzed by onsite cytology, Papanicolaou-stain cytology, and histology. The main outcome measure was diagnostic accuracy for malignancy. The secondary outcome measures were: the median number of passes required to establish a diagnosis, the proportion of patients in whom the diagnosis was established with each pass, and complication rates.ResultsThe overall accuracy of combining onsite cytology with Papanicolaou-stain cytology and histology was not significantly different for the FNB (n = 58) and FNA (n = 58) groups (98.3 % [95 %CI 94.9 % - 100 %] vs. 94.8 % [95 %CI 91.9 % - 100 %]; P = 0.671). Compared with FNA, FNB required a significantly lower median number of needle passes to establish a diagnosis (1.0 vs. 2.0; P < 0.001). On subgroup analysis of 111 patients with malignant lesions, the proportion of patients in whom malignancy was diagnosed on the first pass was significantly greater in the FNB group (72.7 % vs. 37.5 %; P < 0.001).ConclusionsThe overall accuracy of FNB and FNA in patients with solid pancreatic masses was comparable; however, fewer passes were required to establish the diagnosis of malignancy using FNB.This study was registered on the UMIN Clinical Trial Registry (UMIN000014057).© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…