• Users Online:1598
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 

 Table of Contents  
EURO EUS MEETING
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 3  |  Issue : 5  |  Page : 11

Endoscopic ultrasonography-fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: A prospective, randomized, single-blinded, comparative study using the 22 Gauge EchoTip ® ProCoreTM HD (A) and the 22 Gauge EchoTip ® Ultra HD (B) endoscopic ultrasound needles


1 Santa casa, Sao Paulo, Brazil
2 Paoli Calmette, Marseille, France

Date of Web Publication27-Mar-2014

Correspondence Address:
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


Rights and PermissionsRights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Ganc R, Colaiacovo R, Carbonari A, Altenfelder R, Pacheco A, Rocha H, Rossini L, Giovannini M. Endoscopic ultrasonography-fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: A prospective, randomized, single-blinded, comparative study using the 22 Gauge EchoTip ® ProCoreTM HD (A) and the 22 Gauge EchoTip ® Ultra HD (B) endoscopic ultrasound needles. Endosc Ultrasound 2014;3, Suppl S1:11

How to cite this URL:
Ganc R, Colaiacovo R, Carbonari A, Altenfelder R, Pacheco A, Rocha H, Rossini L, Giovannini M. Endoscopic ultrasonography-fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: A prospective, randomized, single-blinded, comparative study using the 22 Gauge EchoTip ® ProCoreTM HD (A) and the 22 Gauge EchoTip ® Ultra HD (B) endoscopic ultrasound needles. Endosc Ultrasound [serial online] 2014 [cited 2020 Jan 27];3, Suppl S1:11. Available from: http://www.eusjournal.com/text.asp?2014/3/5/11/129514

Introduction: In order to improve diagnostic efficacy of pancreatic masses, a new endoscopic ultrasonography-fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) needle was developed (EchoTip ® ProCore TM HD). Very few studies have compared these two needles and none could avoid selection biases.

Aims: The present study intends to compare the results obtained by these two needles when performing EUS-FNA of pancreatic solid lesions.

Patients and Methods: This was a prospective, single-blinded, randomized, controlled trial conducted at a tertiary care referral center. Thirty consecutive patients with solid pancreatic lesions were enrolled to have EUS-FNA performed with two different types of needle. All patients were punctured with the two needles and were randomized regarding the order of the needle to be used.

Results: After collecting data, we used the Fisher's exact test in order to compare the results P <0.05. There was no difference (P = 1.0) regarding introduction, exposition and removal of the needles. The values of sensitivity (92% for needles A and B), specificity (100% × 80%), positive predictive value (100% × 95.8%), negative predictive value (71.4% × 66.6%) and accuracy (93.3% for needle A and 90% for needle B) were not statistically different. The duration of the procedure was the only analyzed parameter, in which we observed a difference between the needles. For needle A, the average time was 2 min 26 s (1 min 30 s-4 min 0 s) and for needle B the average time was 11 min 7 s (6 min 0 s-17 min 0 s).

Conclusion: Even though, the 22 gauge EchoTip ® ProCore TM HD and the 22 gauge EchoTip ® Ultra HD endoscopic ultrasound needles had similar overall results, the ProCore TM needle allowed a much quicker procedure.

Status of the presenting author: Chief resident

The authors declare: No significant relationship.




 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed738    
    Printed21    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded144    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]