Introduction: Fine Needle Biopsy (FNB) has been suggested to provide better histological samples as compared to endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). However, studies comparing EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB for pancreatic lesions reported contrasting results. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical performance of EUS-FNA versus EUS-FNB with ProCore needle for the investigation of pancreatic lesions.
Methods: We reviewed all patients undergoing EUS for the investigation of pancreatic lesions from August 2012 to September 2018. From August 2012 to January 2015 all procedures were performed with standard needles, whereas from February 2015 to September 2018 the use of ProCore needles had been introduced. Data on diagnostic accuracy, number of needle passes and/or adverse events were collected.
Results: 324 patients were retrospectively evaluated: 190 (58.6%) underwent EUS-FNA and 134 (41.4%) EUS-FNB. Both EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB showed high diagnostic accuracy for malignancy [94% (CI 95%:89-97%) vs 94% (CI 95%:89-98%)]. Notable, there were no differences between EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio, histological core tissue retrieval, adverse events or number of needle passes. However, subgroup analysis noted a higher diagnostic accuracy for 25G EUS-FNB as compared to 25G EUS-FNA (85,7% vs 55,5%; *p=0.023).
Conclusion: EUS-FNB with ProCore needle is safe and feasible in pancreatic lesions. ProCore needle did not provide any advantage in terms of diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive and/or negative likelihood ratio, or acquisition of core specimen, therefore its routine application is not
Sa1479 ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND-GUIDED THROUGH-THE-NEEDLE BIOPSY OF PANCREATIC CYSTIC LESIONS: DIAGNOSTIC OUTCOMES AND ADVERSE EVENTS
