A Comparison of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration and Fine-Needle Biopsy in the Diagnosis of Solid Pancreatic Lesions

Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Apr 19:2018:1415062. doi: 10.1155/2018/1415062. eCollection 2018.

Abstract

Background and aims: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is the method of choice for sampling pancreatic lesions. This study compares the diagnostic accuracy and safety of FNB using a novel core needle to FNA in solid pancreatic lesions.

Methods: A retrospective review of patients in whom EUS FNA or FNB was performed for solid pancreatic lesions was conducted. Diagnostic performance was calculated based upon a dual classification system: classification 1, only malignant pathology considered a true positive, versus classification 2, atypical, suspicious, and malignant pathology considered a true positive.

Results: 43 patients underwent FNB compared with 51 FNA. Using classification 1, sensitivity was 74.0% versus 80.0%, specificity 100% versus 100%, and diagnostic accuracy 77.0% versus 80.0% for FNB versus FNA, respectively (all p > 0.05). Using classification 2, sensitivity was 97% versus 94.0%, specificity 100% versus 100%, and diagnostic accuracy 98.0% versus 94.0% for FNB versus FNA, respectively (all p > 0.05). FNB required significantly fewer needle passes (median = 2) compared to FNA (median = 3; p < 0.001). Adverse events occurred in two (4.5%) FNB patients compared with none in the FNA group (p > 0.05).

Conclusion: FNA and FNB have comparable sensitivity and diagnostic accuracy. FNB required fewer passes.

MeSH terms

  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Biopsy, Fine-Needle
  • Diagnosis, Differential
  • Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration / methods*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Pancreas / diagnostic imaging*
  • Pancreatic Neoplasms / diagnosis*
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Retrospective Studies