These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A Comparative Study of the Diagnostic Utility of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology (EUS-FNA) versus Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Biopsy (EUS-FNB) in Pancreatic and Non-Pancreatic Lesions.
    Author: Yousri M, Abusinna E, Tahoun N, Okasha HH, El-Habashi AH.
    Journal: Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2022 Jun 01; 23(6):2151-2158. PubMed ID: 35763660.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has become the procedure of choice to obtain samples from pancreatic lesions. However, it still has limitations affecting its diagnostic yield. The endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) needle was developed to allow acquisition of histological core. We conducted this study to compare the diagnostic yield of the Echotip 22Gauge FNA needle with the 22Gauge acquire FNB needle in pancreatic and non-pancreatic lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective study was carried out on 100 cases of pancreatic and non-pancreatic lesions referred to El-Ebrashi unit of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, internal medicine department, Kasr Al-Aini hospital. The patients included were then randomized for sampling using either the standard Echotip 22Gauge FNA needle or 22Gauge acquire FNB needle. RESULTS: Patients were 57 males and 43 females with a mean age of 58±15 years. Seventy-eight patients had pancreatic lesions, while twenty-two patients had non-pancreatic lesions. Half of the patients (50 cases) underwent EUS-FNA, and the other half (50 cases) underwent EUS-FNB. The presence of adequate tissue core was significantly higher in the FNB group. In contrast, smear cellularity was not significantly different between both groups. FNB had more sensitivity and accuracy depending on cell block/tissue core examination only for diagnosing pancreatic lesions. Blood contamination was higher in cell blocks of the FNA group. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in the combined cytologic and histologic evaluation were 100%. Based on smear only or tissue only, the specificity was 100%, but the sensitivity and accuracy were decreased in both techniques. No complications were reported in both techniques. CONCLUSION: EUS-guided FNA and FNB are safe with comparable diagnostic accuracy in pancreatic and non-pancreatic lesions. FNB improved the histopathological quality of specimens with little blood contamination. Depending on tissue examination only in diagnosing pancreatic lesions, FNB had more sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]