• 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

肝素化湿吸引与干吸引在超声内镜引导下胰腺实性肿块细针穿刺活检中组织质量比较:一项随机交叉研究。

Tissue Quality Comparison Between Heparinized Wet Suction and Dry Suction in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Fine Needle Biopsy of Solid Pancreatic Masses: A Randomized Crossover Study.

机构信息

Departments of Internal Medicine, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, National Cheng Kung University College of Medicine, Tainan, Taiwan.

Departments of Pathology, National Cheng Kung University Hospital, National Cheng Kung University College of Medicine, Tainan, Taiwan.

出版信息

Gut Liver. 2023 Mar 15;17(2):318-327. doi: 10.5009/gnl220030. Epub 2022 Sep 2.

DOI:10.5009/gnl220030
PMID:36052613
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10018294/
Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS: A high-quality sample allows for next-generation sequencing and the administration of more tailored precision medicine treatments. We aimed to evaluate whether heparinized wet suction can obtain higher quality samples than the standard dry-suction method during endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided biopsy of pancreatic masses.

METHODS

A prospective randomized crossover study was conducted. Patients with a solid pancreatic mass were randomly allocated to receive either heparinized wet suction first or dry suction first. For each method, two needle passes were made, followed by a switch to the other method for a total of four needle punctures. The primary outcome was the aggregated white tissue length. Histological blood contamination, diagnostic performance and adverse events were analyzed as secondary outcomes. In addition, the correlation between white tissue length and the extracted DNA amount was analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients were enrolled, and 200 specimens were acquired (100 with heparinized wet suction and 100 with dry suction), with one minor bleeding event. The heparinized wet suction approach yielded specimens with longer aggregated white tissue length (11.07 mm vs 7.96 mm, p=0.001) and less blood contamination (p=0.008). A trend towards decreasing tissue quality was observed for the 2nd pass of the dry-suction method, leading to decreased diagnostic sensitivity and accuracy, although the accumulated diagnostic performance was comparable between the two suction methods. The amount of extracted DNA correlated positively to the white tissue length (p=0.001, Spearman̕s ρ=0.568).

CONCLUSIONS

Heparinized wet suction for EUS tissue acquisition of solid pancreatic masses can yield longer, bloodless, DNA-rich tissue without increasing the incidence of adverse events (ClinicalTrials.gov. identifier NCT04707560).

摘要

背景/目的:高质量的样本可用于下一代测序,并实施更具针对性的精准医疗治疗。我们旨在评估在超声内镜(EUS)引导下胰腺肿块活检中,肝素化湿抽吸是否比标准干吸法能获得更高质量的样本。

方法

进行了一项前瞻性随机交叉研究。将接受 EUS 引导下胰腺肿块活检的患者随机分为肝素化湿抽吸组或标准干吸组。对于每种方法,进行两次穿刺,然后切换到另一种方法,总共进行 4 次穿刺。主要结局是总白色组织长度。分析了组织学血液污染、诊断性能和不良事件等次要结局。此外,还分析了白色组织长度与提取 DNA 量之间的相关性。

结果

共纳入 50 例患者,共采集 200 个标本(肝素化湿抽吸组 100 个,标准干吸组 100 个),仅发生 1 例轻微出血事件。肝素化湿抽吸组的白色组织长度更长(11.07mm 比 7.96mm,p=0.001),血液污染更少(p=0.008)。标准干吸组第 2 次穿刺的组织质量呈下降趋势,导致诊断敏感性和准确性降低,但两种抽吸方法的累积诊断性能相当。提取的 DNA 量与白色组织长度呈正相关(p=0.001,Spearman̕s ρ=0.568)。

结论

肝素化湿抽吸用于 EUS 采集胰腺实性肿块组织可获得更长、无血、富含 DNA 的组织,且不增加不良事件的发生率(ClinicalTrials.gov.标识符 NCT04707560)。

相似文献

1
Tissue Quality Comparison Between Heparinized Wet Suction and Dry Suction in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Fine Needle Biopsy of Solid Pancreatic Masses: A Randomized Crossover Study.肝素化湿吸引与干吸引在超声内镜引导下胰腺实性肿块细针穿刺活检中组织质量比较:一项随机交叉研究。
Gut Liver. 2023 Mar 15;17(2):318-327. doi: 10.5009/gnl220030. Epub 2022 Sep 2.
2
Comparison between modified wet suction and dry suction technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy in pancreatic solid lesions.内镜超声引导下细针活检胰腺实性病变中改良湿吸法与干吸法的比较。
J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2021 Jun;36(6):1663-1669. doi: 10.1111/jgh.15371. Epub 2020 Dec 23.
3
Dry suction versus wet suction technique of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy for diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: study protocol of a multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiority trial.内镜超声引导下细针活检诊断胰腺实性病变的干吸与湿吸技术:一项多中心随机对照非劣效性试验研究方案。
Trials. 2023 Dec 13;24(1):805. doi: 10.1186/s13063-023-07842-8.
4
Diagnostic efficacy of three suction techniques for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions: protocol for a multicenter randomized cross-over clinical trial.三种内镜超声引导下细针抽吸技术对胰腺实性病变活检的诊断效能:一项多中心随机交叉临床试验方案。
Dig Liver Dis. 2020 Jul;52(7):734-739. doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2020.03.026. Epub 2020 May 17.
5
Wet-suction versus slow-pull technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy: a multicenter, randomized, crossover trial.内镜超声引导下细针穿刺活检的湿抽与慢拉技术:一项多中心、随机、交叉试验
Endoscopy. 2023 Mar;55(3):225-234. doi: 10.1055/a-1915-1812. Epub 2022 Aug 1.
6
Detection value of endoscopic ultrasound-guided 19G fine-needle wet-heparinized suction for pancreatic solid tumors: a randomized controlled trial.内镜超声引导下19G细针湿肝素化抽吸对胰腺实性肿瘤的检测价值:一项随机对照试验
Gland Surg. 2023 Apr 28;12(4):442-452. doi: 10.21037/gs-22-742. Epub 2023 Apr 17.
7
Wet- versus dry-suction techniques for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of solid lesions: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.内镜超声引导下细针抽吸术治疗实体性病变的湿吸与干吸技术:一项多中心随机对照试验。
Endoscopy. 2020 Nov;52(11):995-1003. doi: 10.1055/a-1167-2214. Epub 2020 May 15.
8
A prospective pilot comparison of wet and dry heparinized suction for EUS-guided liver biopsy (with videos).超声内镜引导下肝活检中湿肝素化抽吸与干肝素化抽吸的前瞻性试点比较(附视频)
Gastrointest Endosc. 2018 Dec;88(6):919-925. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2018.07.036. Epub 2018 Aug 16.
9
Effect of wet-heparinized suction on the quality of mediastinal solid tumor specimens obtained by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration: a retrospective study from a single center.湿肝素化抽吸对内镜超声引导下细针抽吸获取的纵隔实体瘤标本质量的影响:单中心回顾性研究。
BMC Gastroenterol. 2023 Jun 14;23(1):208. doi: 10.1186/s12876-023-02845-w.
10
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.

引用本文的文献

1
Diagnostic Performance of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Biopsy with Histological Analysis Versus Combined Cytohistological Analysis in Solid Pancreatic Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.内镜超声引导下细针穿刺活检组织学分析与细胞组织学联合分析对实性胰腺病变的诊断性能:一项系统评价和Meta分析
Dig Dis Sci. 2025 Jul 6. doi: 10.1007/s10620-025-09175-9.
2
Comparing needle types and aspiration techniques in EUS-TA to optimize diagnostic efficacy and specimen quality in patients with pancreatic lesions.比较超声内镜引导下细针穿刺活检(EUS-TA)中的针型和抽吸技术,以优化胰腺病变患者的诊断效能和标本质量。
Front Med (Lausanne). 2024 Dec 6;11:1422600. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1422600. eCollection 2024.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Neoadjuvant therapy or upfront surgery for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: A meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.可切除和交界可切除胰腺癌的新辅助治疗或 upfront 手术:随机对照试验的荟萃分析。
Eur J Cancer. 2022 Jan;160:140-149. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2021.10.023. Epub 2021 Nov 24.
2
Confirming Whether Fine Needle Biopsy Device Shortens the Learning Curve of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition Without Rapid Onsite Evaluation.确认细针穿刺活检装置是否能在无快速现场评估的情况下缩短内镜超声引导下组织获取的学习曲线。
Clin Endosc. 2021 May;54(3):420-427. doi: 10.5946/ce.2020.184. Epub 2021 May 28.
3
Updated techniques and evidence for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition from solid pancreatic lesions.
内镜超声引导下从胰腺实性病变获取组织的更新技术与证据
DEN Open. 2024 Jun 20;5(1):e399. doi: 10.1002/deo2.399. eCollection 2025 Apr.
4
Diagnosis by Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Sampling through the Lower Gastrointestinal Tract.经下消化道内镜超声引导下采样进行诊断
Diagnostics (Basel). 2023 Dec 27;14(1):64. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics14010064.
5
Cutting edge of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for solid pancreatic lesions.内镜超声引导下细针抽吸术在胰腺实性病变中的应用进展。
J Med Ultrason (2001). 2024 Apr;51(2):209-217. doi: 10.1007/s10396-023-01375-y. Epub 2023 Nov 1.
Wet- versus dry-suction techniques for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of solid lesions: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.
内镜超声引导下细针抽吸术治疗实体性病变的湿吸与干吸技术:一项多中心随机对照试验。
Endoscopy. 2020 Nov;52(11):995-1003. doi: 10.1055/a-1167-2214. Epub 2020 May 15.
4
Neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgery in resectable pancreatic cancer according to intention-to-treat and per-protocol analysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.新辅助治疗与可切除胰腺癌的直接手术治疗:一项基于意向治疗和方案分析的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Sci Rep. 2019 Oct 30;9(1):15662. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-52167-9.
5
Factors of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition for Successful Next-Generation Sequencing in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.影响胰腺导管腺癌行超声内镜引导下组织获取用于下一代测序成功率的因素。
Gut Liver. 2020 May 15;14(3):387-394. doi: 10.5009/gnl19011.
6
Efficacy of 3 fine-needle biopsy techniques for suspected pancreatic malignancies in the absence of an on-site cytopathologist.在缺乏现场细胞学专家的情况下,3 种细针活检技术对疑似胰腺恶性肿瘤的疗效。
Gastrointest Endosc. 2019 Apr;89(4):825-831.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2018.10.042. Epub 2018 Nov 4.
7
A prospective pilot comparison of wet and dry heparinized suction for EUS-guided liver biopsy (with videos).超声内镜引导下肝活检中湿肝素化抽吸与干肝素化抽吸的前瞻性试点比较(附视频)
Gastrointest Endosc. 2018 Dec;88(6):919-925. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2018.07.036. Epub 2018 Aug 16.
8
Utility of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy for Next-Generation Sequencing of Pancreatic Exocrine Malignancies.内镜超声引导下活检在胰腺外分泌恶性肿瘤下一代测序中的应用价值。
Pancreas. 2018 Sep;47(8):990-995. doi: 10.1097/MPA.0000000000001117.
9
A quarter century of EUS-FNA: Progress, milestones, and future directions.超声内镜引导下细针穿刺活检25年:进展、里程碑与未来方向
Endosc Ultrasound. 2018 May-Jun;7(3):141-160. doi: 10.4103/eus.eus_19_18.
10
Therapeutic developments in pancreatic cancer: current and future perspectives.胰腺癌的治疗进展:现状与未来展望。
Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Jun;15(6):333-348. doi: 10.1038/s41575-018-0005-x.