High and low negative pressure suction techniques in EUS-guided fine-needle tissue acquisition by using 25-gauge needles: a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial

Background EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) has a high diagnostic accuracy for pancreatic diseases. However, although most reports have typically focused on cytology, histological tissue quality has rarely been investigated. The effectiveness of EUS-FNA combined with high negative pressure (HNP) suction was...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Gastrointestinal endoscopy 2014-12, Vol.80 (6), p.1030-1037.e1
Hauptverfasser: Kudo, Taiki, MD, Kawakami, Hiroshi, MD, PhD, Hayashi, Tsuyoshi, MD, PhD, Yasuda, Ichiro, MD, PhD, Mukai, Tsuyoshi, MD, PhD, Inoue, Hiroyuki, MD, PhD, Katanuma, Akio, MD, PhD, Kawakubo, Kazumichi, MD, PhD, Ishiwatari, Hirotoshi, MD, PhD, Doi, Shinpei, MD, PhD, Yamada, Reiko, MD, PhD, Maguchi, Hiroyuki, MD, PhD, Isayama, Hiroyuki, MD, PhD, Mitsuhashi, Tomoko, MD, PhD, Sakamoto, Naoya, MD, PhD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background EUS-guided FNA (EUS-FNA) has a high diagnostic accuracy for pancreatic diseases. However, although most reports have typically focused on cytology, histological tissue quality has rarely been investigated. The effectiveness of EUS-FNA combined with high negative pressure (HNP) suction was recently indicated for tissue acquisition, but has not thus far been tested in a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Objective To evaluate the adequacy of EUS-FNA with HNP for the histological diagnosis of pancreatic lesions by using 25-gauge needles. Design Prospective, single-blind, randomized, controlled crossover trial. Setting Seven tertiary referral centers. Patients Patients referred for EUS-FNA of pancreatic solid lesions. From July 2011 to April 2012, 90 patients underwent EUS-FNA of pancreatic solid masses by using normal negative pressure (NNP) and HNP with 2 respective passes. The order of the passes was randomized, and the sample adequacy, quality, and histology were evaluated by a single expert pathologist. Intervention EUS-FNA by using NNP and HNP. Main Outcome Measurements The adequacy of tissue acquisition and the accuracy of histological diagnoses made by using the EUS-FNA technique with HNP. Results We found that 72.2% (65/90) and 90% (81/90) of the specimens obtained using NNP and HNP, respectively, were adequate for histological diagnosis ( P  = .0003, McNemar test). For 73.3% (66/90) and 82.2% (74/90) of the specimens obtained by using NNP and HNP, respectively, an accurate diagnosis was achieved ( P  = .06, McNemar test). Pancreatitis developed in 1 patient after this procedure, which subsided with conservative therapy. Limitations This was a single-blinded, crossover study. Conclusion Biopsy procedures that combine the EUS-FNA with HNP techniques are superior to EUS-FNA with NNP procedures for tissue acquisition. (Clinical trial registration number: UMIN000005939.)
ISSN:0016-5107
1097-6779
DOI:10.1016/j.gie.2014.04.012