scholarly journals IS THE NEW PROCORE 20G DOUBLE FORWARD-BEVEL NEEDLE CAPABLE TO OBTAIN BETTER HISTOLOGICAL SAMPLES BY ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND FOR DIAGNOSING SOLID PANCREATIC LESIONS?

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
José Celso ARDENGH ◽  
Vitor Ottoboni BRUNALDI ◽  
Mariângela Ottoboni BRUNALDI ◽  
Alberto Facuri GASPAR ◽  
Jorge Resende LOPES-JÚNIOR ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endoscopic Ultrasound ◽  
Fine Needle Biopsy ◽  
Needle Aspiration ◽  
Technical Success ◽  
Tissue Samples ◽  
Fine Needle ◽  
Biopsy Methods ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity ◽  
Adequate Tissue

ABSTRACT Background: It is important to obtain representative histological samples of solid biliopancreatic lesions without a clear indication for resection. The role of new needles in such task is yet to be determined. Aim: To compare performance assessment between 20G double fine needle biopsy (FNB) and conventional 22G fine needle aspiration (FNA) needles for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biopsy. Methods: This prospective study examined 20 patients who underwent the random puncture of solid pancreatic lesions with both needles and the analysis of tissue samples by a single pathologist. Results: The ProCore 20G FNB needle provided more adequate tissue samples (16 vs. 9, p=0.039) with better cellularity quantitative scores (11 vs. 5, p=0.002) and larger diameter of the histological sample (1.51±1.3 mm vs. 0.94±0.55 mm, p=0.032) than the 22G needle. The technical success, puncture difficulty, and sample bleeding were similar between groups. The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy were 88.9%, 100%, and 90% and 77.8%, 100%, and 78.9% for the 20G and 22G needles, respectively. Conclusions: The samples obtained with the ProCore 20G FNB showed better histological parameters; although there was no difference in the diagnostic performance between the two needles, these findings may improve pathologist performance.

scholarly journals Diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition for small solid pancreatic lesions

2020 ◽  
Vol 08 (10) ◽  
pp. E1359-E1364
Author(s):  
Takafumi Mie ◽  
Takashi Sasaki ◽  
Ryo Kanata ◽  
Takaaki Furukawa ◽  
Tsuyoshi Takeda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endoscopic Ultrasound ◽  
Diagnostic Yield ◽  
Fine Needle Biopsy ◽  
Needle Aspiration ◽  
Pancreatic Abscess ◽  
Ultrasound Guided ◽  
Predictive Values ◽  
Fine Needle ◽  
Tissue Acquisition ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

Abstract Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition is sometimes required to diagnose small solid pancreatic lesions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic yield of EUS-guided tissue acquisition for small solid pancreatic lesions and the differences in diagnostic yield among different needles. Patients and method We retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients who had undergone EUS-guided tissue acquisition for solid pancreatic lesions less than 2 cm between November 2012 and June 2019. Three types of needles were evaluated in this study: a 22-gauge fine-needle aspiration (FNA) Lancet needle, a 20-gauge fine-needle biopsy (FNB) Menghini needle with a lateral forward bevel, and a 22-gauge FNB Franseen needle. We evaluated the diagnostic yield and safety of the procedure using these needles. Results We analyzed 160 patients with 163 lesions. The overall sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were 92.0 %, 100 %, and 92.6 %, respectively. In the histological plus cytological diagnosis, accuracies of the Lancet, Menghini, and Franseen needles were 92.7 %, 97.0 %, and 85.7 %, respectively (P = 0.10). In the histological diagnosis alone, the negative predictive values (NPVs) of the Lancet, Menghini, and Franseen needles were 13.3 %, 53.3 %, and 27.3 %, respectively (P = 0.08). Adverse events occurred in four cases (2.5 %): one postprocedural bleeding, two cases of pancreatitis, and one pancreatic abscess. Conclusions EUS-guided tissue acquisition for small solid pancreatic lesions has a high diagnostic yield and safety. This study suggested a difference in the diagnostic yield of each needle for small solid pancreatic lesions.

scholarly journals Comparison of Histological Sample Volumes among Various Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy Needles

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (16) ◽  
pp. 3560
Author(s):  
Kosuke Takahashi ◽  
Ichiro Yasuda ◽  
Tatsuyuki Hanaoka ◽  
Yuka Hayashi ◽  
Iori Motoo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endoscopic Ultrasound ◽  
Blood Clot ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Fine Needle Biopsy ◽  
Needle Aspiration ◽  
Ultrasound Guided ◽  
Tissue Samples ◽  
Fine Needle ◽  
Glass Slides ◽  
Significant Difference

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) enables easy and accurate pathological assessment. Here, we compared and assessed the area of samples on glass slides for three needle types: a 19-gauge Franseen needle (Acquire, Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA), a 22-gauge Franseen needle, and a 19-gauge fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needle (EZ Shot 3 Plus; Olympus, Tokyo, Japan). Among patients with suspected pancreatic cancer, with a ≥20 mm tumor located in the pancreatic body and tail, and who underwent EUS-FNA or FNB between June 2018 and March 2020, 10 were randomly selected to test each needle. The areas of histological tissue and blood clot samples were measured using the BZ-X800 imaging software (Keyence Corporation, Osaka, Japan). Baseline patient characteristics and pathological sample data showed no significant differences among the needles. The 19-gauge Franseen needle obtained significantly more histological tissue samples than the 19-gauge conventional needle (p = 0.010) and 22-gauge Franseen needle (p = 0.008). Conversely, there was no significant difference between the 19-gauge conventional needle and 22-gauge Franseen needle (p = 0.838) in this regard. The 19-gauge Franseen needle could collect more samples than the other needles, contributing to giving a more precise pathological diagnosis and more information, including genomic profiling.

scholarly journals Utility of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) for diagnosing small subepithelial lesions (< 20 mm)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masanari Sekine ◽  
Takaya Miura ◽  
Junichi Fujiwara ◽  
Takeshi Uehara ◽  
Takeharu Asano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endoscopic Ultrasound ◽  
Fine Needle Aspiration ◽  
Needle Biopsy ◽  
Large Diameter ◽  
Fine Needle Biopsy ◽  
Needle Aspiration ◽  
Ultrasound Guided ◽  
Tissue Samples ◽  
Fine Needle ◽  
Subepithelial Lesions

Abstract Aim Subepithelial lesions (SELs) are defined as being located under the mucosa. Presently, endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is commonly performed to diagnose SELs. With the development of new puncture needles, endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB), which allows for the acquisition of large tissue samples, has been proposed. However, studies on EUS-FNB of SELs measuring < 20 mm have not yielded satisfactory results. Therefore, we aimed to assess the performance and usefulness of EUS-FNB of SELs measuring less than < 20 mm. Methods The present study included 62 patients who underwent EUS-FNA or EUS-FNB for SELs at our hospital between January 2015 and March 2019. EUS-FNA was performed using fine-needle aspiration needles, and EUS-FNB was performed using fine-needle biopsy needles. These needles, which come in different shapes and diameters, were compared in terms of their usefulness in performing procedures for SELs measuring ≥ 20 mm and those measuring < 20 mm. Results For SELs measuring ≥ 20 mm, the use of needles with a large diameter, such as 19 or 20 G, resulted in significantly improved diagnostic rates. For SELs measuring < 20 mm, the use of FNB needles showed significantly improved diagnostic rates, regardless of the size of the puncture needles. Conclusion Even when SELs are less than 20 mm, they might have malignant potential, and histological diagnosis may be desirable in some cases. EUS-FNB has an advantage over EUS-FNA in the diagnosis of SELs measuring < 20 mm.

A comparison between 25-gauge and 22-gauge Franseen needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of pancreatic and peripancreatic masses: a randomized non-inferiority study

Endoscopy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dongwook Oh ◽  
Joonseog Kong ◽  
Sung Woo Ko ◽  
Seung-Mo Hong ◽  
Hoonsub So ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Endoscopic Ultrasound ◽  
Care Center ◽  
Tertiary Care ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Fine Needle Biopsy ◽  
Needle Aspiration ◽  
Adverse Event Rate ◽  
Current Standard ◽  
Fine Needle

Abstract Background Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and fine-needle biopsy (FNB) are the current standard of care for sampling pancreatic and peripancreatic masses. Recently, a 22G EUS-FNB needle with Franseen geometry was developed, and this device was also introduced in a 25G platform. We compared the performance of the 25G and 22G Franseen needles for EUS-guided sampling of pancreatic and peripancreatic solid masses. Methods We conducted a parallel-group randomized non-inferiority trial at a tertiary-care center from November 2018 to May 2019. The primary outcome was the quality of the histologic core assessed using the Gerke score. The optimal histologic core is indicated by a Gerke score of 4 or 5, which enables optimal histologic interpretation. The overall diagnostic accuracy and adverse event rate were also evaluated. Results 140 patients were enrolled and randomized (1:1) to the 25G and 22G groups. Tissue acquisition by EUS-FNB was successful in all patients. The optimal histologic core procurement rate was 87.1 % (61/70) for the 25G needle vs. 97.1 % (68/70) for the 22G; difference −10 % (95 % confidence interval −17.35 % to −2.65 %). High quality specimens were more frequently obtained in the 22G group than in the 25G group (70.0 % [49/70] vs. 28.6 % [20 /70], respectively; P < 0.001). The overall diagnostic accuracy did not differ between the groups (97.4 % for 25G vs. 100 % for 22G). Conclusions The 25G Franseen needle was inferior to the 22G needle in histologic core procurement. Therefore, for cases in which tissue architecture is pivotal for diagnosis, a 22G needle, which procures relatively higher quality specimens than the 25G needle, should be used.

Does ProCore fine needle biopsy really improve the clinical outcome of endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of pancreatic masses?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriele Delconte ◽  
Federica Cavalcoli ◽  
Andrea Magarotto ◽  
Giovanni Centonze ◽  
Cristina Bezzio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Endoscopic Ultrasound ◽  
Needle Biopsy ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Negative Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Fine Needle Biopsy ◽  
Fine Needle ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity

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

scholarly journals Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine-needle Aspiration in Lung and Mediastinal Lesions

2010 ◽  
Vol 73 (10) ◽  
pp. 523-529 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lien-Fu Lin ◽  
Pi-Teh Huang ◽  
Ming-Hung Tsai ◽  
Tsung-Ming Chen ◽  
Ka-Sic Ho
Keyword(s):  
Endoscopic Ultrasound ◽  
Fine Needle Aspiration ◽  
Needle Aspiration ◽  
Ultrasound Guided ◽  
Fine Needle

scholarly journals The Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in the Diagnosis of Gallbladder Lesions

Diagnostics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. 1789
Author(s):  
Senju Hashimoto ◽  
Kazunori Nakaoka ◽  
Naoto Kawabe ◽  
Teiji Kuzuya ◽  
Kohei Funasaka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Differential Diagnosis ◽  
High Resolution ◽  
Endoscopic Ultrasound ◽  
Wall Thickness ◽  
Fine Needle Aspiration ◽  
Needle Aspiration ◽  
Histological Diagnosis ◽  
Fine Needle ◽  
High Resolution Images

Gallbladder (GB) diseases represent various lesions including gallstones, cholesterol polyps, adenomyomatosis, and GB carcinoma. This review aims to summarize the role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in the diagnosis of GB lesions. EUS provides high-resolution images that can improve the diagnosis of GB polypoid lesions, GB wall thickness, and GB carcinoma staging. Contrast-enhancing agents may be useful for the differential diagnosis of GB lesions, but the evidence of their effectiveness is still limited. Thus, further studies are required in this area to establish its usefulness. EUS combined with fine-needle aspiration has played an increasing role in providing a histological diagnosis of GB tumors in addition to GB wall thickness.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document