ID: 3526432 DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY AND PROCEDURE TIMES OF ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND GUIDED FINE NEEDLE BIOPSY WITH AND WITHOUT RAPID ON-SITE EVALUATION USING A 22 GAUGE NEEDLE

2021 ◽  
Vol 93 (6) ◽  
pp. AB236
Author(s):  
Zaid Ansari ◽  
Bianca Varda ◽  
Mustafa A. Alani ◽  
Venkata Pulivarthi ◽  
Shehroz Aslam ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Endoscopic Ultrasound ◽  
Needle Biopsy ◽  
Fine Needle Biopsy ◽  
Ultrasound Guided ◽  
Fine Needle ◽  
Site Evaluation

scholarly journals Su1297 ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND-GUIDED FINE NEEDLE BIOPSY: DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY OF CYTOLOGY AND HISTOLOGY

2020 ◽  
Vol 91 (6) ◽  
pp. AB319
Author(s):  
Liza Plafsky ◽  
Tara Keihanian ◽  
Jinendra L. Satiya ◽  
Liege I. Diaz ◽  
Mohit Girotra
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Endoscopic Ultrasound ◽  
Needle Biopsy ◽  
Fine Needle Biopsy ◽  
Ultrasound Guided ◽  
Fine Needle

scholarly journals A Comparison of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration and Fine-Needle Biopsy in the Diagnosis of Solid Pancreatic Lesions

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lachlan R. Ayres ◽  
Elizabeth K. Kmiotek ◽  
Eric Lam ◽  
Jennifer J. Telford
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Endoscopic Ultrasound ◽  
Fine Needle Aspiration ◽  
Needle Biopsy ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Fine Needle Biopsy ◽  
Needle Aspiration ◽  
True Positive ◽  
Ultrasound Guided ◽  
Fine Needle

Background and Aims. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is the method of choice for sampling pancreatic lesions. This study compares the diagnostic accuracy and safety of FNB using a novel core needle to FNA in solid pancreatic lesions. Methods. A retrospective review of patients in whom EUS FNA or FNB was performed for solid pancreatic lesions was conducted. Diagnostic performance was calculated based upon a dual classification system: classification 1, only malignant pathology considered a true positive, versus classification 2, atypical, suspicious, and malignant pathology considered a true positive. Results. 43 patients underwent FNB compared with 51 FNA. Using classification 1, sensitivity was 74.0% versus 80.0%, specificity 100% versus 100%, and diagnostic accuracy 77.0% versus 80.0% for FNB versus FNA, respectively (all p>0.05). Using classification 2, sensitivity was 97% versus 94.0%, specificity 100% versus 100%, and diagnostic accuracy 98.0% versus 94.0% for FNB versus FNA, respectively (all p>0.05). FNB required significantly fewer needle passes (median = 2) compared to FNA (median = 3; p<0.001). Adverse events occurred in two (4.5%) FNB patients compared with none in the FNA group (p>0.05). Conclusion. FNA and FNB have comparable sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy. FNB required fewer passes.

scholarly journals Diagnostic yield of Franseen and Fork-Tip biopsy needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition: a meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 07 (10) ◽  
pp. E1221-E1230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Facciorusso ◽  
Valentina Del Prete ◽  
Vincenzo Rosario Buccino ◽  
Purvi Purohit ◽  
Puneet Setia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Endoscopic Ultrasound ◽  
Needle Biopsy ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Fine Needle Biopsy ◽  
Ultrasound Guided ◽  
Fine Needle ◽  
Tissue Acquisition ◽  
Biopsy Needles

Abstract Background and study aims Although newer needle designs are thought to improve diagnostic outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy, there is limited evidence on their diagnostic performance. The aim of this meta-analysis was to provide a pooled estimate of the diagnostic performance and safety profile of Franseen and Fork-tip fine-needle biopsy needles. Patients and methods Computerized bibliographic search on the main databases was performed through March 2019. The primary endpoint was sample adequacy. Secondary outcomes were diagnostic accuracy, optimal histological core procurement, mean number of needle passes, pooled specificity and sensitivity. Safety data were also analyzed. Results Twenty-four studies with 6641 patients were included and pancreas was the prevalent location of sampled lesions. Overall sample adequacy with the two newer needles was 94.8 % (93.1 % – 96.4 %), with superiority of Franseen needle over Fork-tip (96.1 % versus 92.4 %, P < 0.001). Sample adequacy in targeting pancreatic masses was 95.6% and both needles produced results superior to fine-needle aspiration (FNA) (odds ratio 4.29, 1.49 – 12.35 and 1.79, 1.01 – 3.19 with Franseen and Fork-tip needle, respectively). The rate of histological core procurement was 92.5%, whereas diagnostic accuracy and sensitivity were 95 % and 92.8 %, again with no difference between the two needles. Number of needle passes was significantly lower in comparison to FNA (mean difference: –0.42 with Franseen and –1.60 with Fork-tip needle). No significant adverse events were registered. Conclusion Our meta-analysis speaks in favor of use of newer biopsy needles as a safe and effective tool in endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition.

scholarly journals Usefulness of a Fork-Tip Needle in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy for Gastric Subepithelial Lesions

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. 1883
Author(s):  
Mika Takasumi ◽  
Takuto Hikichi ◽  
Minami Hashimoto ◽  
Jun Nakamura ◽  
Tsunetaka Kato ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multivariate Analysis ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Endoscopic Ultrasound ◽  
Needle Biopsy ◽  
Fine Needle Biopsy ◽  
Needle Aspiration ◽  
Ultrasound Guided ◽  
Fine Needle ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Subepithelial Lesions

The sample adequacy and diagnostic accuracy of an endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for gastric subepithelial lesions (SELs) have been reported to be imperfect. To resolve these issues, a fork-tip needle as an EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needle has been developed. This study was conducted to evaluate the usefulness of a fork-tip needle in an EUS-FNB for gastric SELs. Seventy-nine patients who received an EUS-FNA or FNB using a fork-tip needle for gastric SELs were included in the study. The sample adequacy and diagnostic accuracy were compared between the EUS-FNB with the fork-tip needle group (fork-tip group, n = 13) and the EUS-FNA with FNA needle group (FNA group, n = 66). In addition, a multivariate analysis of the factors influencing diagnostic accuracy was conducted. Regarding sample adequacy, there was no significant difference between the groups (100% vs. 90.9%, respectively; p = 0.582). The diagnostic accuracy of the fork-tip group was numerically higher than that of the FNA group (92.3% vs. 81.8%, respectively; p = 0.682). In a multivariate analysis, the diagnostic accuracy was related to the tumor size and location of the SEL but not to the needle type. In conclusion, this study does not show statistical superiority, but suggests the useful potential of a fork-tip needle.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document