Comparative diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) versus endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) for tissue sampling of solid pancreatic and non-pancreatic lesions without ROSE: a prospective multicenter study

Author:

Okasha Hussein HassanORCID,Ahmed Mohammed YousriORCID,Ahmed Marwa A.ORCID,Elenin Sameh AbouORCID,Abdel-latif AbeerORCID,Farouk MahmoudORCID,Ameen Mahmoud GamalORCID,El-Habashi Ahmed HusseinORCID,Elshaer Mahasen Akram,Alzamzamy Ahmed ElsayedORCID

Abstract

Abstract Background and aims Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition, including both fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB), has been frequently performed to acquire samples from both pancreatic and non-pancreatic lesions. Still, the impact of the diagnostic yield between FNA and FNB is uncertain. We conducted this study to compare the diagnostic performance and accuracy of the 22-gauge FNA needles with the 22-gauge FNB needles in sampling solid pancreatic and non-pancreatic lesions. Methods This is a prospective multicenter study conducted on 465 cases presented with solid pancreatic or non-pancreatic lesions. Results Patients were 275 male and 190 females with a mean age of 59 years. Three-hundred twenty-seven patients had solid pancreatic lesions, while 138 had non-pancreatic lesions; 245 cases underwent EUS-FNA, and the remaining 211 cases underwent EUS-FNB. The presence of intact tissue core and sample adequacy was significantly higher in the FNB cases in solid pancreatic and non-pancreatic lesions. Blood contamination was significantly more in cell blocks and smears of EUS-FNA compared to that of EUS-FNB in solid pancreatic and non-pancreatic lesions. Based on histologic assessment of cell block only, EUS-FNB had more diagnostic accuracy (99%) than FNA (61%) (P-value < 0.005). However, cytological diagnosis by smears only showed no significant difference. The combined cytological and histological evaluation had 100% sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. Conclusion EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB have comparable accuracy in diagnosing solid pancreatic and non-pancreatic lesions without ROSE. EUS-FNB is superior to EUS-FNA in acquiring intact tissue core and adequate samples with little blood contamination. Based on histological assessment (cell block/tissue core) only, EUS-FNA has less accuracy than EUS-FNB in diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

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