Yang R, Naritoku W, Laine L
Department of Medicine, University of Southern California School of Medicine, Los Angeles 90033.
Gastrointest Endosc. 1994 Nov-Dec;40(6):671-4.
We prospectively compared biopsy specimens obtained with reusable and disposable stainless steel biopsy forceps of varying sizes and configurations. Six types of forceps were used: (1) jumbo reusable forceps, (2) jumbo disposable forceps with a Teflon sheath, (3) regular reusable forceps, (4) regular disposable forceps with a Teflon sheath, (5) regular long-jaw disposable forceps, and 6) regular long-jaw disposable forceps with a Teflon sheath. "Jumbo" forceps were those requiring an endoscopic biopsy channel of at least 3.3 mm. "Regular" forceps were those requiring only a 2.8-mm channel. Two biopsy specimens were obtained with each of the six forceps from normal-appearing stomach, duodenum, and sigmoid colon (25 sets at each location). Mixed and coded specimens were scored by a single pathologist for volume (height, width, and length) and histologic depth. Reusable and disposable jumbo forceps yielded biopsy specimens of similar volumes (30 +/- 1 mm3 and 33 +/- 1 mm3, respectively) and histologic depth (grades of 3.3 +/- 0.1 and 3.5 +/- 0.1, respectively). In comparison, the regular-sized biopsy forceps gave specimens with half the volume of those obtained by the jumbo forceps (reusable, 13 +/- 1 mm3; disposable with Teflon sheath, 15 +/- 1 mm3; long-jaw, 16 +/- 1 mm2; and long-jaw with Teflon sheath, 17 +/- 1 mm3). However, the histologic depths of specimens obtained with the regular disposable forceps were the same as those of specimens obtained with the jumbo forceps. Regular reusable biopsy forceps yielded specimens with the smallest overall volume and histologic depth. We conclude that disposable forceps are equivalent to reusable forceps and that the two types can be used interchangeably in gastrointestinal endoscopy. We recommend the use of jumbo forceps whenever possible because they provide biopsy specimens that are double the size of those obtained with regular forceps.
我们前瞻性地比较了使用不同尺寸和构造的可重复使用及一次性不锈钢活检钳获取的活检标本。使用了六种类型的活检钳:(1) 大型可重复使用活检钳;(2) 带聚四氟乙烯鞘的大型一次性活检钳;(3) 常规可重复使用活检钳;(4) 带聚四氟乙烯鞘的常规一次性活检钳;(5) 常规长钳一次性活检钳;以及(6) 带聚四氟乙烯鞘的常规长钳一次性活检钳。“大型”活检钳是指需要至少3.3毫米内镜活检通道的活检钳。“常规”活检钳是指仅需要2.8毫米通道的活检钳。从外观正常的胃、十二指肠和乙状结肠各取六个活检钳中的两个活检标本(每个部位25组)。混合并编码后的标本由一名病理学家对体积(高度、宽度和长度)和组织学深度进行评分。可重复使用和一次性大型活检钳获取的活检标本体积相似(分别为30±1立方毫米和33±1立方毫米),组织学深度也相似(分别为3.3±0.1级和3.5±0.1级)。相比之下,常规尺寸的活检钳获取的标本体积是大型活检钳获取标本体积的一半(可重复使用的为13±1立方毫米;带聚四氟乙烯鞘的一次性活检钳为15±1立方毫米;长钳为16±1平方毫米;带聚四氟乙烯鞘的长钳为17±1立方毫米)。然而,常规一次性活检钳获取的标本组织学深度与大型活检钳获取的标本相同。常规可重复使用活检钳获取的标本总体积和组织学深度最小。我们得出结论,一次性活检钳与可重复使用活检钳等效,并且这两种类型可在胃肠内镜检查中互换使用。我们建议尽可能使用大型活检钳,因为它们提供的活检标本大小是常规活检钳获取标本的两倍。