Abstract

Background: EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has emerged as the primary modality for the cytologic diagnosis of pancreatic solid masses. The aim of this study is to determine whether technical factors including suction (S), non-suction (NS), capillary sampling with stylet slow-pull (CSSS), and the number of needle actuations (to-and-fro needle movements) may affect the accuracy of EUS-FNA for pancreatic solid masses at facilities without on-site cytopathology. Methods: The diagnostic yield of malignancy, blood contamination and cellularity at each sample acquired from EUS-FNA with or without S and different numbers of actuation (10, 15 and 20) were measured (study I). The optimal actuation number was determined and a head-to-head comparison trial between S and CSSS was performed (study II). Results: In study I, significant blood contamination was seen using S with 20 compared with 15 actuations (p = 0.002). Diagnostic yield of malignancy was not significantly different between 10, 15, and 20 actuations with S, whereas it was statistically higher for 15 actuations compared with 10 actuations with NS (p = 0.001). In study II, no difference was noted in diagnostic yield with 15 actuations between S and CSSS (88% vs. 90%, p = 0.74). Conclusions: Increasing actuation in NS resulted in a better diagnostic yield for EUS-FNA without significant blood contamination, whereas increasing actuation in S did not change the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA while causing significant blood contamination. With 15 actuations, the diagnostic yield was comparable between S and CSSS.

Highlights

  • No differences were found in the diagnostic yield of malignancy in each actuation of the S group

  • Our study is the prospective randomised trial to examine the role of actuation with suction (S) vs. non-suction (NS) and capillary sampling with a stylet slow-pull (CSSS) method during EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of pancreatic solid masses

  • The endosonographer was blinded to the results of EUS-FNA because an on-site cytopathologist was not available and the use of suction was masked

Read more

Summary

Introduction

EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has emerged as the primary modality for the cytologic diagnosis of pancreatic solid masses due to its high accuracy and safety [1]. Several factors are important for the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA, including the type and size of the needle [2,3,4], the number of needle passes [5], the presence of an on-site cytopathologist [6,7], the method of cytopathology preparation [8], the use of a stylet [9], the use and type of suction [10], fanning technique [11,12], and the use of contrast-enhanced EUS [13]. The aim of this study is to determine whether technical factors including suction (S), non-suction (NS), capillary sampling with stylet slow-pull (CSSS), and the number of needle actuations (to-and-fro needle movements) may affect the accuracy of EUS-FNA for pancreatic solid masses at facilities without on-site cytopathology. With 15 actuations, the diagnostic yield was comparable between S and CSSS

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call