Randomized controlled trial of comparison of the adequacy, and diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration with and without a stylet in Indian patients: A prospective single blind study

 

PDF Download Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is done using EUS-FNA needle with an internal stylet by most of the endosonographers. There is no data to suggest that it improves the quality of cytology specimen, and it is tedious and time-consuming. Aim: To compare EUS-FNA specimens obtained with stylet and without stylet for adequacy of the specimen, amount of blood on the slide, number of passes and diagnostic yield. Materials and Methods: Patients undergoing EUS-FNA of solid lesions by one experienced endosonographer at an Indian tertiary center from October 2013 to July 2014 were included. Totally, 115 consecutive patients with 128 lesions were randomized to undergo EUS-FNA with or without stylet. Cytology slides were evaluated by a single pathologist blinded to FNA technique. Results: EUS-FNA was done with stylet in 66 lesions (Group 1) and without stylet in 62 lesions (Group 2). Site of lesion was lymph node in 67 (52.3%), pancreas in 43 (33.6%), liver in 8 (6.2%), gastrointestinal subepithelial lesion in 4 (3.1%) and others in 6 (4.9%). The average size of the lesion was 23.7 ± 14.8. When outcomes of two groups were compared, there was no statistically significant difference in adequacy of smears (P = 1.00), amount of blood on slides (P = 0.92), number of passes (P = 0.49) and diagnostic yield (P = 0.86). Conclusions: There was no significant difference in adequacy of the specimen, amount of blood on the slide, number of passes and diagnostic yield between with and without a stylet groups. The use of a stylet does not confer any advantage during EUS-FNA.

• References

• 1 Bardales RH, Stelow EB, Mallery S, Lai R, Stanley MW. Review of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology. Diagn Cytopathol 2006;34:140-75.
• 2 Eloubeidi MA, Gress FG, Savides TJ, Wiersema MJ, Kochman ML, Ahmad NA, et al. Acute pancreatitis after EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses: A pooled analysis from EUS centers in the United States. Gastrointest Endosc 2004;60:385-9.
• 3 Giovannini M, Seitz JF, Monges G, Perrier H, Rabbia I. Fine-needle aspiration cytology guided by endoscopic ultrasonography: Results in 141 patients. Endoscopy 1995;27:171-7.
• 4 DeWitt J, LeBlanc J, McHenry L, Ciaccia D, Imperiale T, Chappo J, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration cytology of solid liver lesions: A large single-center experience. Am J Gastroenterol 2003;98:1976-81.
• 5 Harewood GC, Wiersema MJ. Endosonography-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in the evaluation of pancreatic masses. Am J Gastroenterol 2002;97:1386-91.
• 6 Puri R, Vilmann P, Saftoiu A, Skov BG, Linnemann D, Hassan H, et al. Randomized controlled trial of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle sampling with or without suction for better cytological diagnosis. Scand J Gastroenterol 2009;44:499-504.
• 7 Sakamoto H, Kitano M, Komaki T, Noda K, Chikugo T, Dote K, 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;24:384-90.
• 8 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;70:1093-7.
• 9 Ecka RS, Sharma M. Rapid on-site evaluation of EUS-FNA by cytopathologist: An experience of a tertiary hospital. Diagn Cytopathol 2013;41:1075-80.
• 10 Devicente N, Hawes R, Hoffman B, Vela SA, Romagnuolo J. The yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is not affected by leaving out the stylet. Gastrointest Endosc 2009;69:A335.
• 11 Wani S, Gupta N, Gaddam S, Singh V, Ulusarac O, Romanas M, et al. A comparative study of endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration with and without a stylet. Dig Dis Sci 2011;56:2409-14.
• 12 Sahai AV, Paquin SC, Gariépy G. A prospective comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration results obtained in the same lesion, with and without the needle stylet. Endoscopy 2010;42:900-3.
• 13 LeBlanc JK, Ciaccia D, Al-Assi MT, McGrath K, Imperiale T, Tao LC, et al. Optimal number of EUS-guided fine needle passes needed to obtain a correct diagnosis. Gastrointest Endosc 2004;59:475-81.
• 14 Rastogi A, Wani S, Gupta N, Singh V, Gaddam S, Reddymasu S, et al. A prospective, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial of EUS-guided FNA with and without a stylet. Gastrointest Endosc 2011;74:58-64.