Multiple fine-needle biopsies using a coaxial technique: efficacy and a comparison of three methods.

PURPOSE: Compare the success of three coaxial fine-needle biopsy techniques in obtaining multiple cytologic specimens of high quality. METHODS: For each of three different biopsy needle and technique combinations (aspiration: 22-gauge Chiba; capillary: 22-gauge Chiba; 22-gauge Autovac aspiration biopsy gun), 30 sites (15 liver, 15 kidney) were selected for coaxial fine-needle biopsy in cadaveric liver and kidneys. For each coaxial technique, three sequential biopsies were performed through an 18-gauge coaxial needle at each of multiple sites. The quality of the resultant 270 specimens was graded by a blinded cytopathologist using a previously published grading scheme. RESULTS: Using the coaxial technique, there was no significant dropoff in the cytologic specimen quality among the first, second, and third biopsies at a specific site, regardless of the order of the techniques/needles used. This was true for organs, the overall data, and for the individual five grading criteria. There was, however, a significant difference among the biopsy techniques themselves. Though there was no difference in the quality of cytopathologic specimen obtained with the Autovac aspiration gun and the aspiration technique with a 22-gauge Chiba needle, both were statistically better than the nonaspiration, capillary technique utilizing a 22-gauge needle (p = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The use of a coaxial technique with a fine-needle, 22-gauge biopsy offers unique advantages in obtaining a nearly unlimited amount of high-quality material for cytopathologic analysis. In this study, no dropoff was found in specimen quality with subsequent biopsies.

Fine-needle aspiration biopsy versus fine-needle capillary (nonaspiration) biopsy: in vivo comparison.

PURPOSE: To evaluate, in vivo, the efficacy of fine-needle capillary (nonaspiration) biopsy (FNCB) versus fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) when performed at the same site with a coaxial technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 91 patients, biopsy was performed at 140 sites in 93 lesions mostly throughout the chest and abdomen with either FNCB or FNAB, or both (98 sites). A coaxial technique with a 22-gauge needle was used. The quality of the specimen was graded by a blinded pathologist, who also made a pathologic diagnosis. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was noted in the graded criteria performance plus diagnostic yield between the two techniques. When performed before FNAB, FNCB yielded a better quality specimen of a particular site. However, there was no difference in the graded quality of FNAB whether performed before or after FNCB. Insufficient specimens were obtained at 30 (21.4%) of 140 sites with FNCB versus only 18 (12.8%) with FNAB. CONCLUSION: FNCB is an alternative to FNAB and provides a cellular diagnostic specimen from most lesions. When a coaxial method is used and both techniques are employed, the diagnostic accuracy of these techniques is 84%.

Percutaneous biopsy of the liver and kidney by using coaxial technique: adequacy of the specimen obtained with three different needles in vitro.

OBJECTIVE: The coaxial biopsy technique was evaluated with respect to the quality of specimens obtained from the liver and kidneys in vitro on sequential biopsies at the same site with each of three different biopsy needles. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For each of three different biopsy needles (aspiration 18-gauge Chiba, 18-gauge Sure-Cut, and 18-gauge Biopty), 30 sites (15 liver, 15 kidney) were selected for in vitro coaxial biopsy. At each site, an introducer was placed, through which three sequential biopsies were done. Blinded histopathologic analysis was used to grade the quality of specimens on a scale from 0 (no tissue) to 3 (best) for three criteria: adequacy of tissue for diagnosis, tissue fragmentation, and crush artifact. The overall score was the sum of the scores for the three individual criteria and ranged from 0 (no tissue) to 9 (best). RESULTS: Using an 18-gauge Chiba needle and coaxial technique, we found no significant reduction in specimen quality when we did multiple aspiration biopsies at the same site. However, no tissue was obtained (zero biopsy) from a large number of aspiration biopsies done with the Chiba needle, ranging from 24 of 30 for the first biopsy to 17 of 30 for the third biopsy. Specimen quality was reduced somewhat between the first and third biopsies when the 18-gauge Sure-Cut and Biopty needles were used. With the Sure-Cut needle, this reduction in quality was significant (p = .009) and was primarily related to increased tissue fragmentation and crushing. The reduction in quality with multiple biopsy attempts was less severe with the Biopty needle/gun. Although the mean score decreased from 6.6 for the first biopsy to 5.5 for the third biopsy, this reduction was not significant (p = .06). In addition, the Biopty gun, unlike the other two needles, had few zero biopsies. CONCLUSION: The use of a coaxial technique with an 18-gauge Biopty needle enables collection of a large amount of high-quality tissue for histopathologic analysis with a minimum number of failed biopsies as compared with the 18-gauge Chiba needle and the 18-gauge Sure-Cut needle.