Comparison of submucosal tunneling biopsy versus EUS-guided FNA for gastric subepithelial lesions: a prospective study with crossover design

Author:

Kobara Hideki1,Mori Hirohito1,Nishimoto Naoki2,Fujihara Shintaro1,Nishiyama Noriko1,Ayaki Maki1,Yachida Tatsuo1,Matsunaga Tae1,Chiyo Taiga1,Kobayashi Nobuya1,Fujita Koji1,Kato Kiyohito1,Kamada Hideki1,Oryu Makoto1,Tsutsui Kunihiko1,Iwama Hisakazu3,Haba Reiji4,Masaki Tsutomu1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Gastroenterology and Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, Kagawa University, Kagawa, Japan

2. Department of Clinical Research Support Center, Faculty of Medicine, Kagawa University, Kagawa, Japan

3. Life Science Research Center, Faculty of Medicine, Kagawa University, Kagawa, Japan

4. Department of Diagnostic Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Kagawa University, Kagawa, Japan

Abstract

Abstract Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) for gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions (SELs) has limited diagnostic accuracy due to technical problems and small lesion size. We previously reported a novel submucosal tunneling biopsy (STB) technique for sampling SELs. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic ability and safety of STB compared to that of FNA for SELs. Patients and methods The study was a non-randomized, prospective comparative study with crossover design in patients with endoluminal gastric SELs. Forty-three patients, including 29 cases with lesions < 2 cm were enrolled. A crossover design with 2 intervention stages (Group A: FNA followed by STB for 23 SELs, Group B: STB followed by FNA for 20 SELs) was implemented. The primary outcome was the diagnostic yield (DY). Secondary outcomes were technical success rate, procedure time, complication rate, and sample quality. Results The DY of STB was significantly higher than that of FNA (100 % vs. 34.8 %; P < 0.0001) in group A, including 100 % in overall STB. The technical success rate of STB was significantly higher than that of FNA (100 % vs. 56.5 %; P = 0.0006), whereas the median procedure time of STB was significantly longer than that of FNA (37 minutes vs. 18 minutes; P < 0.0001). The median specimen area of STB samples was markedly larger than that of FNA samples (5.54 mm2 vs. 0.69 mm2; P < 0.001). No complications occurred in either method. Conclusions STB had significantly superior diagnostic ability and a more adequate sample quality than FNA for endoluminal gastric SELs, indicating the suitability of STB for small SELs. Clinical trial registration: UMIN 000006754

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Subject

Gastroenterology,Medicine (miscellaneous)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3