Evaluation of fine needle aspiration vs. fine needle capillary sampling on specimen quality and diagnostic accuracy in endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy

Ian Michael Storch, Daniel A Sussman, Merce Jorda, Afonso Ribeiro

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

26 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To compare percutaneous and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biopsy techniques. Study Design: From July 2005 to February 2006, all patients referred for EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) were considered. If inclusion criteria were met, the first 2 biopsy passes were performed without suction (fine needle capillary [FNC] sampling). Two additional passes were performed using the same needle with 10 mL of applied suction (FNA). A single blinded pathologist later retrospectively evaluated each set of slides. Fifty-three patients met inclusion criteria. The study group comprised pancreatic masses (23), lymph nodes (26), subepithelial masses (3) and liver lesion (1). There were 38 malignant and 15 benign lesions. Results: No statistically significant differences were found with the scoring systems considered in the study. In the subgroups of patients with pancreatic masses, lymph nodes, benign disease and malignant disease, no statistically significant outcomes were noted. Conclusions: No difference exists between quality and diagnostic accuracy of specimens obtained from EUS-guided tissue acquisition via FNC and FNA. The decision to use FNC or FNA should be left to the discretion of the individual endosonographer.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)837-842
Number of pages6
JournalActa Cytologica
Volume51
Issue number6
StatePublished - Jan 1 2007

Fingerprint

Fine Needle Biopsy
Needles
Biopsy
Suction
Lymph Nodes
Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration
Liver

Keywords

  • Aspiration, fine needle
  • Capillary sampling, fine needle
  • Ultrasound, endoscopic

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cell Biology
  • Histology
  • Anatomy

Cite this

Evaluation of fine needle aspiration vs. fine needle capillary sampling on specimen quality and diagnostic accuracy in endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy. / Storch, Ian Michael; Sussman, Daniel A; Jorda, Merce; Ribeiro, Afonso.

In: Acta Cytologica, Vol. 51, No. 6, 01.01.2007, p. 837-842.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{692589fb2a4b465bb757b13f698256db,
title = "Evaluation of fine needle aspiration vs. fine needle capillary sampling on specimen quality and diagnostic accuracy in endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy",
abstract = "Objective: To compare percutaneous and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biopsy techniques. Study Design: From July 2005 to February 2006, all patients referred for EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) were considered. If inclusion criteria were met, the first 2 biopsy passes were performed without suction (fine needle capillary [FNC] sampling). Two additional passes were performed using the same needle with 10 mL of applied suction (FNA). A single blinded pathologist later retrospectively evaluated each set of slides. Fifty-three patients met inclusion criteria. The study group comprised pancreatic masses (23), lymph nodes (26), subepithelial masses (3) and liver lesion (1). There were 38 malignant and 15 benign lesions. Results: No statistically significant differences were found with the scoring systems considered in the study. In the subgroups of patients with pancreatic masses, lymph nodes, benign disease and malignant disease, no statistically significant outcomes were noted. Conclusions: No difference exists between quality and diagnostic accuracy of specimens obtained from EUS-guided tissue acquisition via FNC and FNA. The decision to use FNC or FNA should be left to the discretion of the individual endosonographer.",
keywords = "Aspiration, fine needle, Capillary sampling, fine needle, Ultrasound, endoscopic",
author = "Storch, {Ian Michael} and Sussman, {Daniel A} and Merce Jorda and Afonso Ribeiro",
year = "2007",
month = "1",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "51",
pages = "837--842",
journal = "Acta Cytologica",
issn = "0001-5547",
publisher = "Science Printers and Publishers Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evaluation of fine needle aspiration vs. fine needle capillary sampling on specimen quality and diagnostic accuracy in endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy

AU - Storch, Ian Michael

AU - Sussman, Daniel A

AU - Jorda, Merce

AU - Ribeiro, Afonso

PY - 2007/1/1

Y1 - 2007/1/1

N2 - Objective: To compare percutaneous and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biopsy techniques. Study Design: From July 2005 to February 2006, all patients referred for EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) were considered. If inclusion criteria were met, the first 2 biopsy passes were performed without suction (fine needle capillary [FNC] sampling). Two additional passes were performed using the same needle with 10 mL of applied suction (FNA). A single blinded pathologist later retrospectively evaluated each set of slides. Fifty-three patients met inclusion criteria. The study group comprised pancreatic masses (23), lymph nodes (26), subepithelial masses (3) and liver lesion (1). There were 38 malignant and 15 benign lesions. Results: No statistically significant differences were found with the scoring systems considered in the study. In the subgroups of patients with pancreatic masses, lymph nodes, benign disease and malignant disease, no statistically significant outcomes were noted. Conclusions: No difference exists between quality and diagnostic accuracy of specimens obtained from EUS-guided tissue acquisition via FNC and FNA. The decision to use FNC or FNA should be left to the discretion of the individual endosonographer.

AB - Objective: To compare percutaneous and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biopsy techniques. Study Design: From July 2005 to February 2006, all patients referred for EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) were considered. If inclusion criteria were met, the first 2 biopsy passes were performed without suction (fine needle capillary [FNC] sampling). Two additional passes were performed using the same needle with 10 mL of applied suction (FNA). A single blinded pathologist later retrospectively evaluated each set of slides. Fifty-three patients met inclusion criteria. The study group comprised pancreatic masses (23), lymph nodes (26), subepithelial masses (3) and liver lesion (1). There were 38 malignant and 15 benign lesions. Results: No statistically significant differences were found with the scoring systems considered in the study. In the subgroups of patients with pancreatic masses, lymph nodes, benign disease and malignant disease, no statistically significant outcomes were noted. Conclusions: No difference exists between quality and diagnostic accuracy of specimens obtained from EUS-guided tissue acquisition via FNC and FNA. The decision to use FNC or FNA should be left to the discretion of the individual endosonographer.

KW - Aspiration, fine needle

KW - Capillary sampling, fine needle

KW - Ultrasound, endoscopic

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=36348944542&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=36348944542&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 51

SP - 837

EP - 842

JO - Acta Cytologica

JF - Acta Cytologica

SN - 0001-5547

IS - 6

ER -