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.
- Aspiration, fine needle
- Capillary sampling, fine needle
- Ultrasound, endoscopic
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Cell Biology