Clin Endosc.  2019 Jul;52(4):347-352. 10.5946/ce.2019.005.

Comparison of Endoscopic Ultrasound Biopsy Needles for Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Liver Biopsy

• Eskandari
• Koo P
• Bang H
• Gui D
• Urayama S

• KMID: 2455631
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.5946/ce.2019.005

Abstract

BACKGROUND/AIMS
To compare the performance of latest commercially available endoscopic ultrasound biopsy needles.
METHODS
Six latest commercially available needles were tested on a freshly harvested bovine liver; the tested needles included three 19 G, one 20 G, and two 22 G needles. Five biopsies were performed per needle with 10 mL of wet suction. The primary outcome was the number of complete portal tracts (CPTs) per needle aspirate. The secondary outcomes were the mean specimen length and mean fragment length. Analysis of variance and Tukey's test were applied.
RESULTS
All 19 G needles and the 20 G needle yielded similar mean CPTs and were superior to the SharkCore 22 G needle (p<0.001 adjusted for multiplicity). There was no statistically significant difference in total specimen length among the three 19 G needles and the 20 G needle tested. The two 22 G needles performed similarly with respect to the number of CPTs, mean fragment length, and mean specimen length (adjusted p=0.07, p=0.59, and p=0.10, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
The specimen adequacy was similar among the 3 latest commercially available 19 G needles. The endoscopist may choose a larger-bore needle based on availability without concerns of specimen adequacy. Further studies are needed to assess the ease of needle use in various anatomical locations and to confirm the optimal needle design.

Keyword

Endoscopic ultrasonography; Fine-needle biopsy; Liver

MeSH Terms

Biopsy*
Biopsy, Fine-Needle
Endosonography
Liver*
Needles*
Suction
Ultrasonography*

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1. Tip design of the needles used; from left to right: EZ Shot 3 Plus, EchoTip ProCore, SharkCore, and Acquire.

• 

  Fig. 2. Scope position during biopsy with an endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration needle.

• 

  Fig. 3. Mean number of complete portal tracts per needle type. Variables that share the same letter line are not statistically different (A, B, C).

• 

  Fig. 4. Mean specimen length per needle type. Variables that share the same letter line are not statistically different (A, B, C).

• 

  Fig. 5. Mean fragment length per needle type. Variables that share the same letter line are not statistically different (A, B, C, D).

Reference

1. Kalambokis G, Manousou P, Vibhakorn S, et al. Transjugular liver biopsy-- indications, adequacy, quality of specimens, and complications--a systematic review. J Hepatol. 2007; 47:284–294.

2. Rockey DC, Caldwell SH, Goodman ZD, Nelson RC, Smith AD. Liver biopsy. Hepatology. 2009; 49:1017–1044.

3. Pineda JJ, Diehl DL, Miao CL, et al. EUS-guided liver biopsy provides diagnostic samples comparable with those via the percutaneous or transjugular route. Gastrointest Endosc. 2016; 83:360–365.

4. Gleeson FC, Clayton AC, Zhang L, et al. Adequacy of endoscopic ultrasound core needle biopsy specimen of nonmalignant hepatic parenchymal disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2008; 6:1437–1440.

5. Gor N, Salem SB, Jakate S, Patel R, Shah N, Patil A. Histological adequacy of EUS-guided liver biopsy when using a 19-gauge non-Tru-cut FNA needle. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014; 79:170–172.

6. Dewitt J, McGreevy K, Cummings O, et al. Initial experience with EUS-guided tru-cut biopsy of benign liver disease. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009; 69(3 Pt 1):535–542.

7. Sey MS, Al-Haddad M, Imperiale TF, McGreevy K, Lin J, DeWitt JM. EUS-guided liver biopsy for parenchymal disease: a comparison of diagnostic yield between two core biopsy needles. Gastrointest Endosc. 2016; 83:347–352.

8. Bravo AA, Sheth SG, Chopra S. Liver biopsy. N Engl J Med. 2001; 344:495–500.

9. Stavropoulos SN, Im GY, Jlayer Z, et al. High yield of same-session EUS-guided liver biopsy by 19-gauge FNA needle in patients undergoing EUS to exclude biliary obstruction. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012; 75:310–318.

10. Diehl DL, Johal AS, Khara HS, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy: a multicenter experience. Endosc Int Open. 2015; 3:E210–E215.

11. Schulman AR, Thompson CC, Odze R, Chan WW, Ryou M. Optimizing EUS-guided liver biopsy sampling: comprehensive assessment of needle types and tissue acquisition techniques. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017; 85:419–426.

12. Lee WJ, Uradomo LT, Zhang Y, Twaddell W, Darwin P. Comparison of the diagnostic yield of EUS needles for liver biopsy: ex vivo study. Diagn Ther Endosc. 2017; 2017:1497831.

13. Bang JY, Hebert-Magee S, Navaneethan U, Hasan MK, Hawes R, Varadarajulu S. Randomized trial comparing the Franseen and fork-tip needles for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling of solid pancreatic mass lesions. Gastrointest Endosc. 2018; 87:1432–1438.

14. Kemper AR, Santago AC, Stitzel JD, Sparks JL, Duma SM. Biomechanical response of human liver in tensile loading. Ann Adv Automot Med. 2010; 54:15–26.