Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Digestive Diseases and Sciences 9/2022

02.12.2021 | Original Article

Fine Needle Biopsies of Solid Pancreatic Lesions: Tissue Acquisition Technique and Needle Design Do Not Impact Specimen Adequacy

verfasst von: Antonio Mendoza Ladd, Nancy Casner, Sundar V. Cherukuri, Cesar Garcia, Osvaldo Padilla, Alok Dwivedi, Nawar Hakim

Erschienen in: Digestive Diseases and Sciences | Ausgabe 9/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background and Aims

Data on adequacy of EUS guided biopsies using different tissue acquisition techniques and fine needle aspiration needle designs have been inconclusive. Data on newer fine needle biopsy (FNB) needles are scarce. This study compared the performance of 3 acquisition techniques and 2 fine needle biopsy designs in solid pancreatic lesions.

Methods

Single-center, randomized, pilot clinical trial (Trial registration number NCT03264092). Patients undergoing EUS biopsy of pancreatic lesions were randomized to 1 of 3 acquisition techniques (dry suction, wet suction, slow pull) and 1 of 2 22G FNB needle designs. The primary outcome was specimen cellularity. Secondary outcomes included blood contamination and number of passes needed for diagnosis.

Results

A total of 52 (35.3%), 49 (33.3%) and 46 (31.3%) specimens were obtained with slow pull, dry suction and wet suction, respectively. A total of 56 (38%) and 91 (62%) specimens were obtained with each needle, respectively. No difference in cellularity scores was identified by technique (3.28 vs 3.55 vs 2.94; p = 0.081) or needle type (3.45 vs 3.15; p = 0.19). The same was true for blood contamination and diagnostic pass. A diagnosis was reached after 3 passes in 51 patients (93%). Histological diagnosis was possible in 45 specimens (82%). No severe adverse events occurred.

Conclusions

Cellularity of pancreatic specimens obtained with FNB needles via EUS was not influenced by technique and needle design. Three passes were enough to obtain a histological diagnosis in most patients. Larger clinical trials are required to validate the results of this study.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Hewitt MJ, McPhail MJ, Possamai L, Dhar A, Vlavianos P, Monahan KJ. EUS-guided FNA for diagnosis of solid pancreatic neoplasms: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2012;75:319–331.CrossRef Hewitt MJ, McPhail MJ, Possamai L, Dhar A, Vlavianos P, Monahan KJ. EUS-guided FNA for diagnosis of solid pancreatic neoplasms: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2012;75:319–331.CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Weston BR, Bhutani MS. Optimizing diagnostic yield for EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic lesions: a technical review. Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y) 2013;9:352–363. Weston BR, Bhutani MS. Optimizing diagnostic yield for EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic lesions: a technical review. Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y) 2013;9:352–363.
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Puri R, Vilmann P, Saftoiu A, Skov BG, Linnemann D, Hassan H et al. Randomized controlled trial of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle sampling with or without suction for better cytological diagnosis. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2009;44:499–504.CrossRef Puri R, Vilmann P, Saftoiu A, Skov BG, Linnemann D, Hassan H et al. Randomized controlled trial of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle sampling with or without suction for better cytological diagnosis. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2009;44:499–504.CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Chen JY, Ding QY, Lv Y, Guo W, Zhi FC, Liu SD et al. Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles. World J Gastroenterol 2016;22:8790–8797.CrossRef Chen JY, Ding QY, Lv Y, Guo W, Zhi FC, Liu SD et al. Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles. World J Gastroenterol 2016;22:8790–8797.CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Lee JM, Lee H, Lee JM, Lee SY, Choi BK, Yoo IK et al. Su1378 the usefulness of slow-pull back technique of Eus-Fna in patients with pancreatic mass; a prospective comparative study. Gastrointest Endosc 2017;85:AB357. Lee JM, Lee H, Lee JM, Lee SY, Choi BK, Yoo IK et al. Su1378 the usefulness of slow-pull back technique of Eus-Fna in patients with pancreatic mass; a prospective comparative study. Gastrointest Endosc 2017;85:AB357.
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Facciorusso A, Wani S, Triantafyllou K, Tziatzios G, Cannizzaro R, Muscatiello N et al. Comparative accuracy of needle sizes and designs for EUS tissue sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2019;90:893-903.e7.CrossRef Facciorusso A, Wani S, Triantafyllou K, Tziatzios G, Cannizzaro R, Muscatiello N et al. Comparative accuracy of needle sizes and designs for EUS tissue sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2019;90:893-903.e7.CrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Mangiavillano B, Sosa-Valencia L, Deprez P, Eisendrath P, Robles-Medranda C, Eusebi LH et al. Tissue acquisition and pancreatic masses: which needle and which acquisition technique should be used? Endosc Int Open 2020;8:E1315–E1320.CrossRef Mangiavillano B, Sosa-Valencia L, Deprez P, Eisendrath P, Robles-Medranda C, Eusebi LH et al. Tissue acquisition and pancreatic masses: which needle and which acquisition technique should be used? Endosc Int Open 2020;8:E1315–E1320.CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Kandel P, Tranesh G, Nassar A, Bingham R, Raimondo M, Woodward TA et al. EUS-guided fine needle biopsy sampling using a novel fork-tip needle: a case–control study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;84:1034–1039.CrossRef Kandel P, Tranesh G, Nassar A, Bingham R, Raimondo M, Woodward TA et al. EUS-guided fine needle biopsy sampling using a novel fork-tip needle: a case–control study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;84:1034–1039.CrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Mitri RD, Rimbaş M, Attili F, Fabbri C, Carrara S, Di Maurizio L et al. Performance of a new needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy in patients with pancreatic solid lesions: a retrospective multicenter study. Endosc Ultrasound 2018;7:329–334.CrossRef Mitri RD, Rimbaş M, Attili F, Fabbri C, Carrara S, Di Maurizio L et al. Performance of a new needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy in patients with pancreatic solid lesions: a retrospective multicenter study. Endosc Ultrasound 2018;7:329–334.CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Witt BL, Factor RE, Chadwick BE, Caron J, Siddiqui AA, Adler DG. Evaluation of the SharkCore. Endosc Ultrasound 2018;7:323–328.CrossRef Witt BL, Factor RE, Chadwick BE, Caron J, Siddiqui AA, Adler DG. Evaluation of the SharkCore. Endosc Ultrasound 2018;7:323–328.CrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Gerke H, Rizk MK, Vanderheyden AD, Jensen CS. Randomized study comparing endoscopic ultrasound-guided Trucut biopsy and fine needle aspiration with high suction. Cytopathology 2010;21:44–51.CrossRef Gerke H, Rizk MK, Vanderheyden AD, Jensen CS. Randomized study comparing endoscopic ultrasound-guided Trucut biopsy and fine needle aspiration with high suction. Cytopathology 2010;21:44–51.CrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Wee E, Lakhtakia S, Gupta R, Sekaran A, Kalapala R, Monga A et al. Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration of lymph nodes and solid masses: factors influencing the cellularity and adequacy of the aspirate. J Clin Gastroenterol 2012;46:487–493.CrossRef Wee E, Lakhtakia S, Gupta R, Sekaran A, Kalapala R, Monga A et al. Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration of lymph nodes and solid masses: factors influencing the cellularity and adequacy of the aspirate. J Clin Gastroenterol 2012;46:487–493.CrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Wani S, Early D, Kunkel J, Leathersich A, Hovis CE, Hollander TG et al. Diagnostic yield of malignancy during EUS-guided FNA of solid lesions with and without a stylet: a prospective, single blind, randomized, controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2012;76:328–335.CrossRef Wani S, Early D, Kunkel J, Leathersich A, Hovis CE, Hollander TG et al. Diagnostic yield of malignancy during EUS-guided FNA of solid lesions with and without a stylet: a prospective, single blind, randomized, controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2012;76:328–335.CrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Abe Y, Kawakami H, Oba K, Hayashi T, Yasuda I, Mukai T et al. Effect of a stylet on a histological specimen in EUS-guided fine-needle tissue acquisition by using 22-gauge needles: a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2015;82:837–44.e1.CrossRef Abe Y, Kawakami H, Oba K, Hayashi T, Yasuda I, Mukai T et al. Effect of a stylet on a histological specimen in EUS-guided fine-needle tissue acquisition by using 22-gauge needles: a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2015;82:837–44.e1.CrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Attam R, Arain MA, Bloechl SJ, Trikudanathan G, Munigala S, Bakman Y et al. “Wet suction technique (WEST)”: a novel way to enhance the quality of EUS-FNA aspirate. Results of a prospective, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial using a 22-gauge needle for EUS-FNA of solid lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 2015;81:1401–1407.CrossRef Attam R, Arain MA, Bloechl SJ, Trikudanathan G, Munigala S, Bakman Y et al. “Wet suction technique (WEST)”: a novel way to enhance the quality of EUS-FNA aspirate. Results of a prospective, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial using a 22-gauge needle for EUS-FNA of solid lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 2015;81:1401–1407.CrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Lee KY, Cho HD, Hwangbo Y, Yang JK, Han SJ, Choi HJ et al. Efficacy of 3 fine-needle biopsy techniques for suspected pancreatic malignancies in the absence of an on-site cytopathologist. Gastrointest Endosc 2019;89:825–31.e1.CrossRef Lee KY, Cho HD, Hwangbo Y, Yang JK, Han SJ, Choi HJ et al. Efficacy of 3 fine-needle biopsy techniques for suspected pancreatic malignancies in the absence of an on-site cytopathologist. Gastrointest Endosc 2019;89:825–31.e1.CrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Weston BR, Ross WA, Bhutani MS, Lee JH, Pande M, Sholl AB et al. Prospective randomized comparison of a 22G core needle using standard versus capillary suction for EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses. Endosc Int Open 2017;5:E505.CrossRef Weston BR, Ross WA, Bhutani MS, Lee JH, Pande M, Sholl AB et al. Prospective randomized comparison of a 22G core needle using standard versus capillary suction for EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses. Endosc Int Open 2017;5:E505.CrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat DiMaio CJ, Kolb JM, Benias PC, Shah H, Shah S, Haluszka O et al. Initial experience with a novel EUS-guided core biopsy needle (SharkCore): results of a large North American multicenter study. Endosc Int Open 2016;4:E974–E979.CrossRef DiMaio CJ, Kolb JM, Benias PC, Shah H, Shah S, Haluszka O et al. Initial experience with a novel EUS-guided core biopsy needle (SharkCore): results of a large North American multicenter study. Endosc Int Open 2016;4:E974–E979.CrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Cheng B, Zhang Y, Chen Q, Sun B, Deng Z, Shan H et al. Analysis of fine-needle biopsy vs fine-needle aspiration in diagnosis of pancreatic and abdominal masses: a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018;16:1314–1321.CrossRef Cheng B, Zhang Y, Chen Q, Sun B, Deng Z, Shan H et al. Analysis of fine-needle biopsy vs fine-needle aspiration in diagnosis of pancreatic and abdominal masses: a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018;16:1314–1321.CrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Wang Y, Wang RH, Ding Z, Tan SY, Chen Q, Duan YQ et al. Wet- versus dry-suction techniques for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of solid lesions: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy 2020;52:995–1003.CrossRef Wang Y, Wang RH, Ding Z, Tan SY, Chen Q, Duan YQ et al. Wet- versus dry-suction techniques for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of solid lesions: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Endoscopy 2020;52:995–1003.CrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Di Mitri R, Mocciaro F, Antonini F, Scimeca D, Conte E, Bonaccorso A et al. Stylet slow-pull vs standard suction technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy in pancreatic solid lesions using 20 Gauge Procore™ needle: a multicenter randomized trial. Dig Liver Dis 2020;52:178–184.CrossRef Di Mitri R, Mocciaro F, Antonini F, Scimeca D, Conte E, Bonaccorso A et al. Stylet slow-pull vs standard suction technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy in pancreatic solid lesions using 20 Gauge Procore™ needle: a multicenter randomized trial. Dig Liver Dis 2020;52:178–184.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Fine Needle Biopsies of Solid Pancreatic Lesions: Tissue Acquisition Technique and Needle Design Do Not Impact Specimen Adequacy
verfasst von
Antonio Mendoza Ladd
Nancy Casner
Sundar V. Cherukuri
Cesar Garcia
Osvaldo Padilla
Alok Dwivedi
Nawar Hakim
Publikationsdatum
02.12.2021
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Digestive Diseases and Sciences / Ausgabe 9/2022
Print ISSN: 0163-2116
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-2568
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-021-07316-4

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 9/2022

Digestive Diseases and Sciences 9/2022 Zur Ausgabe

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag

Update Innere Medizin

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.