skip to main content
Idioma:

Suction versus slow-pull for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic tumors: a prospective randomized trial

Cheng, Spencer ; Brunaldi, Vitor O. ; Minata, Mauricio K. ; Chacon, Danielle A. ; da Silveira, Eduardo B. ; de Moura, Diogo TH ; dos Santos, Marcos EL ; Matuguma, Sergio E. ; Chaves, Dalton M. ; França, Raony F. ; Jacomo, Alfredo L. ; Artifon, Everson LA

HPB (Oxford, England), 2020-05, Vol.22 (5), p.779-786 [Periódico revisado por pares]

England: Elsevier Ltd

Texto completo disponível

Citações Citado por
  • Título:
    Suction versus slow-pull for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic tumors: a prospective randomized trial
  • Autor: Cheng, Spencer ; Brunaldi, Vitor O. ; Minata, Mauricio K. ; Chacon, Danielle A. ; da Silveira, Eduardo B. ; de Moura, Diogo TH ; dos Santos, Marcos EL ; Matuguma, Sergio E. ; Chaves, Dalton M. ; França, Raony F. ; Jacomo, Alfredo L. ; Artifon, Everson LA
  • É parte de: HPB (Oxford, England), 2020-05, Vol.22 (5), p.779-786
  • Notas: ObjectType-Article-2
    SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
    ObjectType-News-1
    ObjectType-Feature-3
    content type line 23
  • Descrição: Suction (S) is commonly used to improve cell acquisition during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). Slow-pull (SP) sampling is another technique that might procure good quality specimens with less bloodiness. We aimed to determine if SP improves the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA of pancreatic masses. Patients with pancreatic solid masses were randomized to four needle passes with both techniques in an alternate fashion. Sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values were calculated. Cellularity and bloodiness of cytological samples were assessed and compared according to the technique. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of suction vs. SP were 95.2% vs. 92.3%; 100% vs. 100; 95.7% vs. 93%, respectively. As to the association of methods, they were 95.6, 100 and 96%, respectively. Positive predictive values for S and SP were 100%. There was no difference in diagnostic yield between S and SP (p = 0.344). Cellularity of samples obtained with SP and Suction were equivalent in both smear evaluation (p = 0.119) and cell-block (0.980). Bloodiness of SP and suction techniques were similar as well. S and SP techniques provide equivalent sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy. Association of methods seems to improve diagnostic yield. Suction does not increase the bloodiness of samples compared to slow-pull.
  • Editor: England: Elsevier Ltd
  • Idioma: Inglês
Links
Voltar para lista de resultados

  • Realização: ABCD-USP USP   Logos de Redes Sociais: Freepik

Buscando em bases de dados remotas. Favor aguardar.