TY - JOUR
T1 - A multicenter randomized trial comparing a 25-gauge EUS fine-needle aspiration device with a 20-gauge EUS fine-needle biopsy device
AU - van Riet, Priscilla A.
AU - Larghi, Alberto
AU - Attili, Fabia
AU - Rindi, Guido
AU - Nguyen, Nam Quoc
AU - Ruszkiewicz, Andrew
AU - Kitano, Masayuki
AU - Chikugo, Takaaki
AU - Aslanian, Harry
AU - Farrell, James
AU - Robert, Marie
AU - Adeniran, Adebowale
AU - Van Der Merwe, Schalk
AU - Roskams, Tania
AU - Chang, Kenneth
AU - Lin, Fritz
AU - Lee, John G.
AU - Arcidiacono, Paolo Giorgio
AU - Petrone, Mariachiara
AU - Doglioni, Claudio
AU - Iglesias-Garcia, Julio
AU - Abdulkader, Ihab
AU - Giovannini, Marc
AU - Bories, Erwan
AU - Poizat, Flora
AU - Santo, Erwin
AU - Scapa, Erez
AU - Marmor, Silvia
AU - Bucobo, Juan Carlos
AU - Buscaglia, Jonathan M.
AU - Heimann, Alan
AU - Wu, Maoxin
AU - Baldaque-Silva, Francisco
AU - Moro, Carlos Fernández
AU - Erler, Nicole S.
AU - Biermann, Katharina
AU - Poley, Jan Werner
AU - Cahen, Djuna L.
AU - Bruno, Marco J.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
PY - 2019/2
Y1 - 2019/2
N2 - Background and Aims: Several studies have compared EUS-guided FNA with fine-needle biopsy (FNB), but none have proven superiority. We performed a multicenter randomized controlled trial to compare the performance of a commonly used 25-gauge FNA needle with a newly designed 20-gauge FNB needle. Methods: Consecutive patients with a solid lesion were randomized in this international multicenter study between a 25-gauge FNA (EchoTip Ultra) or a 20-gauge FNB needle (ProCore). The primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy for malignancy and the Bethesda classification (non-diagnostic, benign, atypical, malignant). Technical success, safety, and sample quality were also assessed. Multivariable and supplementary analyses were performed to adjust for confounders. Results: A total of 608 patients were allocated to FNA (n = 306) or FNB (n = 302); 312 pancreatic lesions (51%), 147 lymph nodes (24%), and 149 other lesions (25%). Technical success rate was 100% for the 25-gauge FNA and 99% for the 20-gauge FNB needle (P =.043), with no differences in adverse events. The 20-gauge FNB needle outperformed 25-gauge FNA in terms of histologic yield (77% vs 44%, P <.001), accuracy for malignancy (87% vs 78%, P =.002) and Bethesda classification (82% vs 72%, P =.002). This was robust when corrected for indication, lesion size, number of passes, and presence of an on-site pathologist (odds ratio, 3.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.55-8.56; P =.004), and did not differ among centers (P =.836). Conclusion: The 20-gauge FNB needle outperformed the 25-gauge FNA needle in terms of histologic yield and diagnostic accuracy. This benefit was irrespective of the indication and was consistent among participating centers, supporting the general applicability of our findings. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02167074.)
AB - Background and Aims: Several studies have compared EUS-guided FNA with fine-needle biopsy (FNB), but none have proven superiority. We performed a multicenter randomized controlled trial to compare the performance of a commonly used 25-gauge FNA needle with a newly designed 20-gauge FNB needle. Methods: Consecutive patients with a solid lesion were randomized in this international multicenter study between a 25-gauge FNA (EchoTip Ultra) or a 20-gauge FNB needle (ProCore). The primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy for malignancy and the Bethesda classification (non-diagnostic, benign, atypical, malignant). Technical success, safety, and sample quality were also assessed. Multivariable and supplementary analyses were performed to adjust for confounders. Results: A total of 608 patients were allocated to FNA (n = 306) or FNB (n = 302); 312 pancreatic lesions (51%), 147 lymph nodes (24%), and 149 other lesions (25%). Technical success rate was 100% for the 25-gauge FNA and 99% for the 20-gauge FNB needle (P =.043), with no differences in adverse events. The 20-gauge FNB needle outperformed 25-gauge FNA in terms of histologic yield (77% vs 44%, P <.001), accuracy for malignancy (87% vs 78%, P =.002) and Bethesda classification (82% vs 72%, P =.002). This was robust when corrected for indication, lesion size, number of passes, and presence of an on-site pathologist (odds ratio, 3.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.55-8.56; P =.004), and did not differ among centers (P =.836). Conclusion: The 20-gauge FNB needle outperformed the 25-gauge FNA needle in terms of histologic yield and diagnostic accuracy. This benefit was irrespective of the indication and was consistent among participating centers, supporting the general applicability of our findings. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02167074.)
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85058810250&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.gie.2018.10.026
DO - 10.1016/j.gie.2018.10.026
M3 - Article
C2 - 30367877
AN - SCOPUS:85058810250
SN - 0016-5107
VL - 89
SP - 329
EP - 339
JO - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
JF - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
IS - 2
ER -