ABSTRACT
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.
RESUMO Racional: As lesões sólidas pancreáticas não ressecáveis cirurgicamente demandam boa amostragem tecidual para definição histológica e condução oncológica . O papel das novas agulhas de ecopunção no aprimoramento diagnóstico ainda necessita elucidação. Objetivo: Comparar as biópsias guiadas por ecoendoscoopia com a nova agulha 20G de bisel frontal duplo (FNB) com a agulha de aspiração fina 22G convencional. Métodos: Este estudo prospectivo avaliou 20 pacientes submetidos à punção de lesões pancreáticas sólidas com ambas agulhas e envolveu análise de amostras teciduais por um único patologista. Resultados: A agulha FNB 20G forneceu amostras de tecido mais adequadas (16 vs. 9, p=0,039) com melhores escores quantitativos de celularidade (11 vs. 5, p=0,002) e maior diâmetro máximo da amostra histológica (1,51±1,3 mm vs. 0,94±0,55 mm, p=0,032) que a agulha 22G. O sucesso técnico, dificuldade de punção e sangramento da amostra foram semelhantes entre os grupos. A sensibilidade, especificidade e acurácia diagnóstica foram 88,9%, 100% e 90% e 77,8%, 100% e 78,9% para as agulhas 20G e 22G, respectivamente. Conclusão: As amostras obtidas com a FNB 20G apresentaram melhores parâmetros histológicos, embora não tenha havido diferença no desempenho diagnóstico entre as duas agulhas.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adolescent , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Young Adult , Pancreas/diagnostic imaging , Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology , Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration/standards , Needles/classification , Pancreas/pathology , Pancreatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Prospective Studies , Sensitivity and Specificity , Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration/instrumentation , Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration/methods , Needles/adverse effectsABSTRACT
Our aim in this study was to compare the efficiency of 25G versus 22G needles in diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions by EUS-FNA. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. Studies were identified in five databases using an extensive search strategy. Only randomized trials comparing 22G and 25G needles were included. The results were analyzed by fixed and random effects. A total of 504 studies were found in the search, among which 4 randomized studies were selected for inclusion in the analysis. A total of 462 patients were evaluated (233: 25G needle/229: 22G needle). The diagnostic sensitivity was 93% for the 25G needle and 91% for the 22G needle. The specificity of the 25G needle was 87%, and that of the 22G needle was 83%. The positive likelihood ratio was 4.57 for the 25G needle and 4.26 for the 22G needle. The area under the sROC curve for the 25G needle was 0.9705, and it was 0.9795 for the 22G needle, with no statistically significant difference between them (p=0.497). Based on randomized studies, this meta-analysis did not demonstrate a significant difference between the 22G and 25G needles used during EUS-FNA in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions.
Subject(s)
Humans , Pancreas/pathology , Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology , Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration/instrumentation , Needles/standards , Pancreatic Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Likelihood Functions , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Sensitivity and Specificity , Efficiency , Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration/standards , Data AccuracyABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the diagnosis improvement of EUS-FNA when using ROSE performed by the endosonographer. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted. A total of 48 pancreatic solid masses EUS-FNA were divided into two groups according to the availability of on-site cytology (ROSE) - the first 24 patients (group A-without ROSE) and the latter 24 cases (group B-with ROSE). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, accuracy, complications and inadequacy rate of EUS-FNA were determined and compared. RESULTS: Among the 48 EUS-FNA, the overall performance was: sensitivity 82%; specificity 100%; positive predictive value (PPV) 100%; negative predictive value (NPV) 70% and accuracy 87%. The sensitivity of the Group A was 71%, versus 94% in-group B (p=0.61). Moreover, the negative predictive value was 58% versus 87% (p=0.72). The accuracy rate increased from 79% to 96% (p=0.67) in the ROSE group. The number of punctures was similar between the groups. No major complications were reported. CONCLUSION: Rapid on-site cytopathological examination, even when performed by the endosonographer, may improve the diagnostic performance in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions, regardless of the slight increase in the number of punctures. .
Subject(s)
Humans , Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration/standards , Endosonography/standards , Pancreas/pathology , Pancreatic Diseases/pathology , Adenocarcinoma/pathology , Adenocarcinoma , Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration/methods , Endosonography/methods , Prospective Studies , Pancreas , Pancreatic Diseases , Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology , Pancreatic Neoplasms , Quality Improvement , Reproducibility of Results , Retrospective Studies , Sensitivity and SpecificityABSTRACT
Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA, punção aspirativa por agulha guiada por ultrassom endobrônquico) tem desempenhado um papel fundamental no diagnóstico de lesões mediastinais, paratraqueais e peribrônquicas, assim como no estadiamento linfonodal da neoplasia pulmonar. Por se tratar de exame endoscópico minimamente invasivo cujo rendimento diagnóstico tem se mostrado comparável aos métodos cirúrgicos estabelecidos, o procedimento de EBUS-TBNA ganhou espaço rapidamente e já se encontra integrado à rotina de investigação em serviços de referência. Para a realização de EBUSTBNA, é importante o planejamento prévio ao procedimento, que deve incluir uma análise minuciosa dos exames radiológicos e cuidado especial com a coleta e preparo do material, além do domínio da técnica e conhecimento de eventuais complicações inerentes ao procedimento. As principais indicações para a realização de EBUS-TBNA são o estadiamento linfonodal da neoplasia pulmonar e a investigação diagnóstica de massas e linfonodomegalias mediastinais ou hilares. Recentemente, iniciou-se a identificação de biomarcadores tumorais em amostras neoplásicas; essa análise molecular no material coletado durante o procedimento de EBUS-TBNA provou ser totalmente possível. Até o momento, o procedimento de EBUS-TBNA não consta nas tabelas de procedimentos médicos da Associação Médica Brasileira. O procedimento de EBUS-TBNA tem se mostrado seguro e eficaz no estadiamento e reestadiamento de neoplasia de pulmão e no esclarecimento diagnóstico de lesões ou linfonodomegalias mediastinais, paratraqueais e peribrônquicas.
Endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) has played a key role in the diagnosis of mediastinal, paratracheal, and peribronchial lesions, as well as in lymph node staging for lung cancer. Despite its minimally invasive character, EBUS-TBNA has demonstrated a diagnostic yield comparable with that of established surgical methods. It has therefore gained credibility and has become a routine procedure at various referral centers. A successful EBUS-TBNA procedure requires careful planning, which includes a thorough review of the radiological imaging and special care during specimen collection and preparation, as well as technical expertise, experience with the procedure itself, and knowledge of the potential complications inherent to the procedure. The most common indications for EBUS-TBNA include lymph node staging for lung cancer and the diagnostic investigation of mediastinal/hilar masses and lymph node enlargement. Recently, tumor biomarkers in malignant samples collected during the EBUS-TBNA procedure have begun to be identified, and this molecular analysis has proven to be absolutely feasible. The EBUS-TBNA procedure has yet to be included on the Brazilian Medical Association list of medical procedures approved for reimbursement. The EBUS-TBNA procedure has shown to be a safe and accurate tool for lung cancer staging/restaging, as well as for the diagnosis of mediastinal, paratracheal, and peribronchial lesions/lymph node enlargement.