Department of Gastroenterology, The Third Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, 138 Tongzipo Road, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Hunan Key Laboratory of Nonresolving Inflammation and Cancer, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China.
Surg Endosc. 2018 Aug;32(8):3533-3539. doi: 10.1007/s00464-018-6075-6. Epub 2018 Feb 5.
BACKGROUND: To compare the diagnostic yield and safety of 22G endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) in the diagnosis of pancreatic solid lesions. METHODS: Between April 2014 and September 2015, 36 patients with pancreatic solid lesions were included for endoscopic ultrasound test. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: EUS-FNA (n = 18) and EUS-FNB (n = 18). Each nidus was punctured three times (15 ~ 20 insertions for each puncture) with a 22G needle. The core specimens were analyzed, and the diagnostic yields of FNA and FNB were evaluated. RESULTS: The procedure success rate was 100% with no complications. Cytological and histological examinations found that the diagnostic yield of FNB and FNA were both 83.3%. To get a definitive diagnosis, FNB needed fewer punctures than FNA (1.11 vs. 1.83; P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: 22G EUS-FNB is a safe and effective way to diagnose pancreatic solid lesions. FNB required a lower number of needle passes to achieve a diagnosis compared with FNA.
背景：比较 22G 内镜超声引导下细针抽吸（EUS-FNA）和内镜超声引导下细针活检（EUS-FNB）在诊断胰腺实性病变中的诊断效能和安全性。
方法：2014 年 4 月至 2015 年 9 月期间，共有 36 例胰腺实性病变患者接受内镜超声检查。患者随机分为两组：EUS-FNA（n = 18）和 EUS-FNB（n = 18）。每个病灶用 22G 针穿刺三次（每次穿刺 15 至 20 次）。分析核心标本，评估 FNA 和 FNB 的诊断率。
结果：操作成功率为 100%，无并发症。细胞学和组织学检查发现 FNB 和 FNA 的诊断率均为 83.3%。为了获得明确的诊断，FNB 需要的穿刺次数少于 FNA（1.11 次比 1.83 次；P ＜0.05）。
结论：22G 内镜超声引导下 FNB 是诊断胰腺实性病变的一种安全有效的方法。与 FNA 相比，FNB 获得诊断所需的针数更少。
Gastrointest Endosc. 2016-3-24
Diagnostics (Basel). 2025-7-2
ACG Case Rep J. 2024-3-28
J Gastrointest Oncol. 2015-8
World J Gastroenterol. 2014-9-14
World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2012-12-16
Zotero 插件
