الفهرس 
A comparative study of the Diagnostic Utility of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) versus Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Biopsy (EUS-FNB)
ContentsOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 147 |  |  |
| | | from | 147 | | |
Abstract
Using standard needles, endoscopic ultrasound-guided fineneedle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has a high diagnostic value in evaluating solid
lesions. The endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB)
was designed to enhance the quality of EUS-guided tissue sampling by
providing core biopsies. We conduct this study to compare the diagnostic
yield and accuracy of the 22-G FNA needle with the 20G, 22G, or 25G
procore needles in sampling pancreatic and other intra-abdominal lesions.
Material and methods: This prospective study included 100 cases presented
either with pancreatic or non-pancreatic and referred to Kasr Al Aini hospital,
internal medicine department, from May 2018 to March 2021. Patients were
randomly assigned to one of two groups: EUS-FNA (n = 50) or EUS-FNB (n
= 50). The primary objectives were to compare the diagnostic yield and the
median number of passes necessary to retrieve core tissue using EUS-FNA
and EUS-FNB needles.
Results: The study involved 100 patients, 57 males and 43 females, with a
mean age of 58±15 years (range: 26–81 years). No significant difference was
detected between EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB regarding safety, diagnostic
accuracy, or the median number of needle passes. However, FNB needles
outperformed FNA in histologic yield (98% vs 88%, P = 0.001). Tissue blood
contamination was significantly higher in cell blocks of the FNA group.
Conclusion: EUS-guided FNA and FNB have comparable diagnostic
accuracy for pancreatic and non-pancreatic lesions. However, FNB improved
the histopathologic quality of samples, facilitating immunohistochemistry and
molecular studies needed for individualized therapy.