4.6 Article

Effectiveness of EUS-Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy versus EUS-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration: A Retrospective Analysis

Journal

DIAGNOSTICS
Volume 11, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11060965

Keywords

endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration; endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy; pancreatic tumor; subepithelial lesions

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study retrospectively compared the diagnostic abilities of EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB for pancreatic tumors and SEL, indicating that both procedures had a comparable diagnostic ability.
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for pancreatic tumors and subepithelial lesions (SEL) of the gastrointestinal tract are effective for histological diagnosis. There are also reports that tissue sampling is possible with a smaller number of punctures by EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB). In this study, we retrospectively compared the diagnostic abilities of EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB. We examined 130 patients who underwent EUS-FNA/EUS-FNB for pancreatic tumors and SEL from July 2018 to January 2021. None of the cases underwent rapid on-site evaluation. There were 94 and 36 cases in the EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB groups, respectively. The median tumor size in the EUS-FNB group was 30 mm, which was significantly larger than the EUS-FNA group (p = 0.02). In addition, transgastric puncture was significantly more common in the EUS-FNB group (p = 0.01). The EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB groups had a sensitivity of 82.9% and 91.7% and an accuracy rate of 85.1% and 91.7%, respectively. However, both procedures had a comparable diagnostic ability.

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