4.6 Review

Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration vs fine needle biopsy for pancreatic masses, subepithelial lesions, and lymph nodes

Journal

WORLD JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
Volume 27, Issue 26, Pages 4194-4207

Publisher

BAISHIDENG PUBLISHING GROUP INC
DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v27.i26.4194

Keywords

Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration; Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle biopsy; Pancreatic lesions; Subepithelial lesions; Lymph node biopsy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Endoscopic ultrasound tissue acquisition, through EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB, is commonly used for pancreatic mass lesions, subepithelial lesions, and lymph node biopsy. While both methods are safe and offer high diagnostic value, there are potential limitations with EUS-FNA related to cytological aspirations. Comparative trials between EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB for pancreatic mass lesions have shown conflicting results, with the need for further large-scale studies for other types of lesions.
Endoscopic ultrasound tissue acquisition, in the form of both fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB), is utilized for pancreatic mass lesions, subepithelial lesions, and lymph node biopsy. Both procedures are safe and yield high diagnostic value. Despite its high diagnostic yield, EUS-FNA has potential limitations associated with cytological aspirations, including inability to determine histologic architecture, and a small quantitative sample for further immunohistochemical staining. EUS-FNB, with its larger core biopsy needle, was designed to overcome these potential limitations. However, it remains unclear which technique should be used and for which lesions. Comparative trials are plagued by heterogeneity at every stage of comparison; including variable needles used, and different definitions of endpoints, which therefore limit generalizability. Thus, we present a review of prospective trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses on studies examining EUS-FNA vs EUS-FNB. Prospective comparative trials of EUS-FNA vs EUS-FNB primarily focus on pancreatic mass lesions, and yield conflicting results in terms of demonstrating the superiority of one method. However, consistent among trials is the potential for diagnosis with fewer passes, and a larger quantity of sample achieved for next generation sequencing. With regard to subepithelial lesions and lymph node biopsy, fewer prospective trials exist, and larger prospective studies are necessary. Based on the available literature, we would recommend EUS-FNB for peri-hepatic lymph nodes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available