• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

慢拉技术可获得更好质量的涂片:内镜超声引导下细针抽吸术的慢拉技术与标准抽吸技术的前瞻性比较。

Slow-pull technique yields better quality smears: prospective comparison of slow-pull and standard suction techniques of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration.

机构信息

First Department of Medicine, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary.

Department of Pathology, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary.

出版信息

Scand J Gastroenterol. 2020 Nov;55(11):1369-1376. doi: 10.1080/00365521.2020.1825792. Epub 2020 Oct 5.

DOI:10.1080/00365521.2020.1825792
PMID:33016159
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic accuracy and quality of smears obtained by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) are influenced by characteristics of suction and examined organ.

AIMS AND METHODS

Efficiency of EUS-FNA and quality of smears obtained by slow-pull (SP) and standard suction (SS) techniques was prospectively compared in the sampling of pancreatic ( = 56) and extrapancreatic ( = 145) tumors.

RESULTS

SS technique resulted in a higher number of smear pairs both in pancreatic (1.74 vs. 3.19;  < 0.001) and extrapancreatic tumors (1.62 vs. 3.28;  < 0.001); however, it decreased the proportion of diagnostic smears (46.69% vs. 36.52%;  = 0.002 and 49.17% vs. 30.67%;  < 0.001) and increased the bloodiness (1.51 vs. 2.07;  < 0.001 and 1.48 vs. 2.05;  < 0.001). In pancreatic cancers, no difference was observed in terms of diagnostic accuracy (81.38% vs. 83.45%) and cellularity (1.44 vs. 1.27;  = 0.067); however, they were substantially higher in extrapancreatic tumors using SP technique (71.41% vs. 60.71% and 1.34 vs. 0.77;  < 0.001). Only SP technique resulted in a significant difference between examiners in terms of technical success rate and quality of smears without any decrease of diagnostic accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

SP technique yields better quality smears independently from tumors characteristics; however, it shows significant examiner-dependency. SS technique reduces the diagnostic accuracy of sampling in extrapancreatic tumors.

摘要

背景

内镜超声引导下细针抽吸(EUS-FNA)获得的诊断准确性和涂片质量受到抽吸和检查器官的特征影响。

目的和方法

本研究前瞻性比较了慢拉(SP)和标准抽吸(SS)技术在胰腺( = 56)和胰腺外肿瘤( = 145)取样中的效率和涂片质量。

结果

SS 技术在胰腺(1.74 比 3.19;  < 0.001)和胰腺外肿瘤(1.62 比 3.28;  < 0.001)中均获得了更多的涂片对;然而,它降低了诊断性涂片的比例(46.69%比 36.52%;  = 0.002 和 49.17%比 30.67%;  < 0.001),增加了涂片的血液含量(1.51 比 2.07;  < 0.001 和 1.48 比 2.05;  < 0.001)。在胰腺腺癌中,诊断准确性(81.38%比 83.45%)和细胞数量(1.44 比 1.27;  = 0.067)无差异;然而,在使用 SP 技术时,胰腺外肿瘤的这些参数显著更高(71.41%比 60.71%和 1.34 比 0.77;  < 0.001)。只有 SP 技术在技术成功率和涂片质量方面,不同检查者之间存在显著差异,而不会降低诊断准确性。

结论

SP 技术独立于肿瘤特征产生更好质量的涂片,但具有明显的检查者依赖性。SS 技术降低了胰腺外肿瘤采样的诊断准确性。

相似文献

1
Slow-pull technique yields better quality smears: prospective comparison of slow-pull and standard suction techniques of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration.慢拉技术可获得更好质量的涂片:内镜超声引导下细针抽吸术的慢拉技术与标准抽吸技术的前瞻性比较。
Scand J Gastroenterol. 2020 Nov;55(11):1369-1376. doi: 10.1080/00365521.2020.1825792. Epub 2020 Oct 5.
2
Prospective comparison of slow-pull and standard suction techniques of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic cancer.内镜超声引导下细针穿刺活检中慢拉与标准抽吸技术在实体胰腺癌诊断中的前瞻性比较
BMC Gastroenterol. 2019 Jan 9;19(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s12876-018-0921-9.
3
Suction versus slow-pull for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic tumors: a prospective randomized trial.内镜超声引导下胰腺肿瘤细针抽吸术的吸引法与慢拉法:一项前瞻性随机试验
HPB (Oxford). 2020 May;22(5):779-786. doi: 10.1016/j.hpb.2019.10.007. Epub 2019 Oct 31.
4
Stylet slow-pull vs. standard suction technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy in pancreatic solid lesions using 20 Gauge Procore™ needle: A multicenter randomized trial.使用 20G Procore™ 针的内镜超声引导下细针活检胰腺实性病变中针芯慢拉与标准抽吸技术的比较:一项多中心随机试验。
Dig Liver Dis. 2020 Feb;52(2):178-184. doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2019.08.023. Epub 2019 Oct 7.
5
Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles.使用22号针在内镜超声引导下对胰腺实性病变进行细针穿刺抽吸时的慢拉及不同常规抽吸技术。
World J Gastroenterol. 2016 Oct 21;22(39):8790-8797. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i39.8790.
6
Slow-Pull Using a Fanning Technique Is More Useful Than the Standard Suction Technique in EUS-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration in Pancreatic Masses.在超声内镜引导下对胰腺肿块进行细针抽吸时,扇形牵拉法比标准抽吸法更有用。
Gut Liver. 2018 May 15;12(3):360-366. doi: 10.5009/gnl17140.
7
Slow pull versus suction in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid masses.内镜超声引导下细针抽吸胰腺实性肿块时缓慢提拉与抽吸的比较。
Dig Dis Sci. 2014 Jul;59(7):1578-85. doi: 10.1007/s10620-013-3019-9. Epub 2014 Jan 16.
8
Stylet slow-pull versus standard suction for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: a multicenter randomized trial.内镜超声引导下细针抽吸术治疗胰腺实性病变时,慢拉式与标准抽吸式套管针的比较:一项多中心随机试验。
Endoscopy. 2018 May;50(5):497-504. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-122381. Epub 2017 Dec 22.
9
Diagnostic ability of EUS-FNA for pancreatic solid lesions with conventional 22-gauge needle using the slow pull technique: a prospective study.使用慢拉技术的传统22号针进行EUS-FNA对胰腺实性病变的诊断能力:一项前瞻性研究
Scand J Gastroenterol. 2015 Jul;50(7):900-7. doi: 10.3109/00365521.2014.983155. Epub 2015 Mar 2.
10
The slow-pull capillary technique increases the quality of endoscopic ultrasound fine needle biopsy samples in solid pancreatic lesions.缓慢抽吸毛细管技术可提高实体胰腺病变内镜超声细针穿刺活检样本的质量。
Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016 Aug;28(8):911-6. doi: 10.1097/MEG.0000000000000638.

引用本文的文献

1
22-gauge Co-Cr versus stainless-steel Franseen needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition in patients with solid pancreatic lesions.22号钴铬合金 Franseen 针与不锈钢 Franseen 针用于实体胰腺病变患者的超声内镜引导下组织获取的比较
Clin Endosc. 2024 Mar;57(2):237-245. doi: 10.5946/ce.2023.011. Epub 2024 Jan 26.
2
Risk Factors and Interpretation of Inconclusive Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology in the Diagnosis of Solid Pancreatic Lesions.内镜超声引导下细针穿刺活检在实性胰腺病变诊断中不确定结果的危险因素及解读
Diagnostics (Basel). 2023 Sep 1;13(17):2841. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13172841.