Clin Endosc.  2014 Sep;47(5):425-428. 10.5946/ce.2014.47.5.425.

Fine-Needle Biopsy: Should This Be the First Choice in Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition?

• Kim EY

• KMID: 2165374
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2014.47.5.425

Abstract

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition is an indispensable technique for the diagnosis of many diseases of the gastrointestinal tract and adjacent structures. EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is known for its high accuracy and low complication rate. However, the outcome of EUS-FNA highly depends on several factors such as the location and characteristics of the lesion, endosonographer's experience, technique of sampling and sample preparation, type and size of the needle used, and presence of a cytopathologist for rapid on-site examination. EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy is useful to obtain core tissue samples with relatively fewer passes. Aspiration of core tissue with preserved architecture is beneficial for the diagnosis of certain diseases and the performance of ancillary testing such as tumor molecular profiling. Issues related to needle size, type, and their acquired samples for cytologic and histologic evaluation are discussed here.

Keyword

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition; Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration; Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy; Cytology; Core biopsy

MeSH Terms

Biopsy, Fine-Needle*
Diagnosis
Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration
Gastrointestinal Tract
Needles
Ultrasonography

Reference

1. Kedia P, Gaidhane M, Kahaleh M. Technical advances in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition for pancreatic cancers: how can we get the best results with EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration? Clin Endosc. 2013; 46:552–562. PMID: 24143320.

2. Savides TJ. Tricks for improving EUS-FNA accuracy and maximizing cellular yield. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009; 69(2 Suppl):S130–S133. PMID: 19179138.

3. Varadarajulu S, Bang JY, Hebert-Magee S. Assessment of the technical performance of the flexible 19-gauge EUS-FNA needle. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012; 76:336–343. PMID: 22817786.

4. Kaffes A, Corte C. Fine-needle aspiration at endoscopic ultrasound with a novel side-port needle: a pilot experience. Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2012; 5:89–94.

5. Jenssen C, Dietrich CF. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy and trucut biopsy in gastroenterology: an overview. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2009; 23:743–759. PMID: 19744637.

6. Iglesias-Garcia J, Poley JW, Larghi A, et al. Feasibility and yield of a new EUS histology needle: results from a multicenter, pooled, cohort study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011; 73:1189–1196. PMID: 21420083.

7. Puli SR, Bechtold ML, Buxbaum JL, Eloubeidi MA. How good is endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in diagnosing the correct etiology for a solid pancreatic mass?: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Pancreas. 2013; 42:20–26. PMID: 23254913.

8. Kaffes AJ, Chen RY, Tam W, et al. A prospective multicenter evaluation of a new side-port endoscopic ultrasound-fine-needle aspiration in solid upper gastrointestinal lesions. Dig Endosc. 2012; 24:448–451. PMID: 23078438.

9. Iwashita T, Nakai Y, Samarasena JB, et al. High single-pass diagnostic yield of a new 25-gauge core biopsy needle for EUS-guided FNA biopsy in solid pancreatic lesions. Gastrointest Endosc. 2013; 77:909–915. PMID: 23433596.

10. Larghi A, Verna EC, Stavropoulos SN, Rotterdam H, Lightdale CJ, Stevens PD. EUS-guided trucut needle biopsies in patients with solid pancreatic masses: a prospective study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2004; 59:185–190. PMID: 14745390.

11. Wittmann J, Kocjan G, Sgouros SN, Deheragoda M, Pereira SP. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue sampling by combined fine-needle aspiration and trucut needle biopsy: a prospective study. Cytopathology. 2006; 17:27–33. PMID: 16417562.

12. Ginès A, Wiersema MJ, Clain JE, Pochron NL, Rajan E, Levy MJ. Prospective study of a Trucut needle for performing EUS-guided biopsy with EUS-guided FNA rescue. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005; 62:597–601. PMID: 16185976.

13. Matynia AP, Schmidt RL, Barraza G, Layfield LJ, Siddiqui AA, Adler DG. Impact of rapid on-site evaluation on the adequacy of endoscopic-ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014; 29:697–705. PMID: 24783248.

14. Kim GH, Cho YK, Kim EY, et al. Comparison of 22-gauge aspiration needle with 22-gauge biopsy needle in endoscopic ultrasonography-guided subepithelial tumor sampling. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2014; 49:347–354. PMID: 24325591.

15. Yasuda I, Goto N, Tsurumi H, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy for diagnosis of lymphoproliferative disorders: feasibility of immunohistological, flow cytometric, and cytogenetic assessments. Am J Gastroenterol. 2012; 107:397–404. PMID: 21989147.

16. Iwashita T, Yasuda I, Doi S, et al. Use of samples from endoscopic ultrasound-guided 19-gauge fine-needle aspiration in diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012; 10:316–322. PMID: 22019795.

17. de la Fuente SG, Arnoletti JP. Beyond cytology: why and when does the oncologist require core tissue? Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2014; 24:9–17. PMID: 24215757.

18. Karadsheh Z, Al-Haddad M. Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle tissue acquisition: where we stand in 2013? World J Gastroenterol. 2014; 20:2176–2185. PMID: 24605016.

19. Song TJ, Kim JH, Lee SS, et al. The prospective randomized, controlled trial of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration using 22G and 19G aspiration needles for solid pancreatic or peripancreatic masses. Am J Gastroenterol. 2010; 105:1739–1745. PMID: 20216532.

20. Siddiqui UD, Rossi F, Rosenthal LS, Padda MS, Murali-Dharan V, Aslanian HR. EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses: a prospective, randomized trial comparing 22-gauge and 25-gauge needles. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009; 70:1093–1097. PMID: 19640524.

21. Madhoun MF, Wani SB, Rastogi A, et al. The diagnostic accuracy of 22-gauge and 25-gauge needles in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: a meta-analysis. Endoscopy. 2013; 45:86–92. PMID: 23307148.

22. Sakamoto H, Kitano M, Komaki T, et al. Prospective comparative study of the EUS guided 25-gauge FNA needle with the 19-gauge Trucut needle and 22-gauge FNA needle in patients with solid pancreatic masses. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009; 24:384–390. PMID: 19032453.

23. Strand DS, Jeffus SK, Sauer BG, Wang AY, Stelow EB, Shami VM. EUS-guided 22-gauge fine-needle aspiration versus core biopsy needle in the evaluation of solid pancreatic neoplasms. Diagn Cytopathol. 2014; 42:751–758. PMID: 24550162.

24. Bang JY, Hebert-Magee S, Trevino J, Ramesh J, Varadarajulu S. Randomized trial comparing the 22-gauge aspiration and 22-gauge biopsy needles for EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic mass lesions. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012; 76:321–327. PMID: 22658389.

25. Affolter KE, Schmidt RL, Matynia AP, Adler DG, Factor RE. Needle size has only a limited effect on outcomes in EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig Dis Sci. 2013; 58:1026–1034. PMID: 23086117.

26. Storch I, Jorda M, Thurer R, et al. Advantage of EUS Trucut biopsy combined with fine-needle aspiration without immediate on-site cytopathologic examination. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006; 64:505–511. PMID: 16996340.

27. Noda Y, Fujita N, Kobayashi G, et al. Diagnostic efficacy of the cell block method in comparison with smear cytology of tissue samples obtained by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration. J Gastroenterol. 2010; 45:868–875. PMID: 20177713.

28. Bang JY, Varadarajulu S. Procore and flexible 19 gauge needle can replace trucut biopsy needle? Clin Endosc. 2013; 46:503–505. PMID: 24143312.

29. Varadarajulu S, Hawes RH. The changing paradigm in EUS-guided tissue acquisition. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2014; 24:1–7. PMID: 24215756.