Center for Interventional Endoscopy.
Department of Pathology, AdventHealth Orlando, Orlando, Florida.
Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021 Apr;19(4):825-835.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2020.06.042. Epub 2020 Jul 8.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Given the lack of procedure standardization, findings vary from analyses of pancreatic tissues collected by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy. It is not clear which needle and technique yield the best specimen for analysis. We compared the specimen quality and accuracy of diagnoses made from samples collected by fine-needle biopsy needles using different collection techniques.
Patients found to have pancreatic masses during imaging (n = 129) were assigned randomly to groups from whom pancreatic tissue samples were collected by reverse-bevel, Menghini-tip, franseen, or fork-tip needles. A second randomization determined the technical sequence of biopsies in each patient (suction, no suction, and stylet retraction). Two independent pathologists, blinded to the type of needle and sampling technique, analyzed all the samples. Final diagnoses of malignancy were made based on surgical resection, death from cancer progression, or findings from radiology or clinical follow-up evaluations (reference standard). The primary objective was to compare the cellularity of the samples collected, defined as the proportion of core tissue in the biopsy sample. Secondary objectives were to compare the accuracy of diagnoses made from biopsy samples and identify factors associated with high cellularity.
One-hundred and nine patients had a final diagnosis of malignancy (84.5%) and 20 patients had benign disease (15.5%). Samples collected by fork-tip or franseen needles had significantly higher cellularity than samples collected by reverse-bevels or Menghini-tip needles (P < .001). Neoplasias were identified with greater than 90% accuracy using samples collected by fork-tip or franseen needles (P < .001 compared with other needles). On multivariable regression analysis, use of franseen needles (odds ratio [OR], 4.42; 95% CI, 2.58-7.58; P < .001) or fork-tip needles (OR, 3.86; 95% CI, 2.24-6.64; P < .001), stylet retraction (OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.21-3.72; P = .008), no suction (OR, 2.74; 95% CI, 1.57-4.80; P < .001), and pancreatic mass larger than 3 cm (OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.21-3.05; P = .005) were associated with high cellularity of the sample.
In patients with suspected pancreatic cancer, samples with the highest degree of cellularity in a single biopsy, resulting in a diagnostic accuracy of 90% of higher, were collected by fine-needle biopsy using the franseen or fork-tip needle. Clinicaltrials.gov no: NCT04085055.
由于缺乏程序标准化,从内镜超声引导下细针活检采集的胰腺组织分析中得出的结果各不相同。目前尚不清楚哪种针和技术能够提供用于分析的最佳标本。我们比较了使用不同采集技术的细针活检针采集的标本的质量和诊断准确性。
对影像学检查发现胰腺肿块的患者(n=129)进行随机分组,分别使用反向斜面、Menghini 尖端、franseen 或叉状尖端针采集胰腺组织样本。第二次随机化确定了每位患者活检的技术顺序(抽吸、不抽吸和活检针芯回缩)。两位独立的病理学家对所有样本进行了盲法分析,不知道针的类型和采样技术。恶性肿瘤的最终诊断是基于手术切除、癌症进展导致的死亡,或影像学或临床随访评估的结果(参考标准)。主要目的是比较采集样本的细胞数量,定义为活检样本中核心组织的比例。次要目标是比较活检样本的诊断准确性,并确定与高细胞数量相关的因素。
109 例患者最终诊断为恶性肿瘤(84.5%),20 例患者为良性疾病(15.5%)。使用叉状尖端或 franseen 针采集的样本细胞数量明显高于使用反向斜面或 Menghini 尖端针采集的样本(P<.001)。使用叉状尖端或 franseen 针采集的样本可准确识别 90%以上的肿瘤(与其他针相比,P<.001)。多变量回归分析显示,使用 franseen 针(优势比[OR],4.42;95%CI,2.58-7.58;P<.001)或叉状尖端针(OR,3.86;95%CI,2.24-6.64;P<.001)、活检针芯回缩(OR,2.13;95%CI,1.21-3.72;P=.008)、不抽吸(OR,2.74;95%CI,1.57-4.80;P<.001)和胰腺肿块大于 3cm(OR,1.92;95%CI,1.21-3.05;P=.005)与样本高细胞数量相关。
在疑似胰腺癌患者中,使用 franseen 或叉状尖端针进行细针活检可获得最高程度的单个活检样本细胞数量,诊断准确率达到 90%或更高。临床试验编号:NCT04085055。