Suppr超能文献

多中心随机临床试验中内镜超声细针抽吸与内镜超声细针活检对实体病灶的比较。

Comparison of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Fine-Needle Aspiration and Endoscopic Ultrasound-Fine-Needle Biopsy for Solid Lesions in a Multicenter, Randomized Trial.

机构信息

Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York.

Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York.

出版信息

Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Aug;16(8):1307-1313.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.06.013. Epub 2017 Jun 15.

Abstract

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopic ultrasound with fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is the standard of care for tissue sampling of solid lesions adjacent to the gastrointestinal tract. Fine-needle biopsy (FNB) may provide higher diagnostic yield with fewer needle passes. The aim of this study was to assess the difference in diagnostic yield between FNA and FNB.

METHODS

This is a multicenter, prospective randomized clinical trial from 6 large tertiary care centers. Patients referred for tissue sampling of solid lesions were randomized to either FNA or FNB of the target lesion. Demographics, size, location, number of needle passes, and final diagnosis were recorded.

RESULTS

After enrollment, 135 patients were randomized to FNA (49.3%), and 139 patients were randomized to FNB (50.7%).The following lesions were sampled: mass (n = 210, 76.6%), lymph nodes (n = 46, 16.8%), and submucosal tumors (n = 18, 6.6%). Final diagnosis was malignancy (n = 192, 70.1%), reactive lymphadenopathy (n = 30, 11.0%), and spindle cell tumors (n = 24, 8.8%). FNA had a diagnostic yield of 91.1% compared with 88.5% for FNB (P = .48). There was no difference between FNA and FNB when stratified by the presence of on-site cytopathology or by type of lesion sampled. A median of 1 needle pass was needed to obtain a diagnostic sample for both needles.

CONCLUSIONS

FNA and FNB obtained a similar diagnostic yield with a comparable number of needle passes. On the basis of these results, there is no significant difference in the performance of FNA compared with FNB in the cytologic diagnosis of solid lesions adjacent to the gastrointestinal tract. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01698190.

摘要

背景与目的

内镜超声引导下细针穿刺抽吸术(FNA)是胃肠道邻近实体病灶组织取样的标准治疗方法。细针活检(FNB)可能通过较少的针数获得更高的诊断率。本研究旨在评估 FNA 和 FNB 在诊断率方面的差异。

方法

这是一项来自 6 家大型三级保健中心的多中心前瞻性随机临床试验。将需要进行实体病灶组织取样的患者随机分为 FNA 组或 FNB 组。记录人口统计学、大小、位置、针数和最终诊断。

结果

入组后,135 例患者被随机分为 FNA 组(49.3%),139 例患者被随机分为 FNB 组(50.7%)。取样的病灶包括肿块(n=210,76.6%)、淋巴结(n=46,16.8%)和黏膜下肿瘤(n=18,6.6%)。最终诊断为恶性肿瘤(n=192,70.1%)、反应性淋巴结病(n=30,11.0%)和梭形细胞肿瘤(n=24,8.8%)。FNA 的诊断率为 91.1%,而 FNB 的诊断率为 88.5%(P=.48)。在有现场细胞学或取样病灶类型的情况下,FNA 和 FNB 之间没有差异。两种针均需要 1 次穿刺即可获得诊断性样本。

结论

FNA 和 FNB 的诊断率相似,所需的针数也相似。基于这些结果,在胃肠道邻近实体病灶的细胞学诊断方面,FNA 与 FNB 的性能没有显著差异。临床试验注册号:NCT01698190。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验