Comparison between Two Types of 22-Gauge Fine-Needle Biopsy for Solid Pancreatic Tumors.

Background: Tissue sampling using endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration is the gold standard for diagnosing malignant pancreatic tumors; however, its sensitivity and specificity are highly variable. Thus, fine-needle biopsy using cutting needles has been developed to overcome current limitations and improve diagnostic yield. Our study compared two fine-needle biopsy needles for tissue sampling for pancreatic solid lesions.
Materials and Methods: Samples obtained from patients with pancreatic solid lesions using the 22-gauge fine-needle biopsy needles (Franseen needle or reverse bevel needle) were retrospectively analyzed. The primary outcomes were diagnostic yield and sample adequacy. The secondary outcome was diagnostic performance. The analysis was performed using 2 × 2 tables to calculate sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy for each needle type. Proportions were compared using the Z test. For quantitative variables, a comparative analysis was performed using Student's t test. Qualitative and unpaired outcome variables were described using Fisher's exact test.
Results: Sixty-three patients with pancreatic lesions were included in the analysis. The fine-needle biopsy Franseen and reverse bevel groups included 33 and 30 patients, respectively. An adequate sample was obtained in 97% of patients in the Franseen needle group versus 80% in the reverse bevel needle group; the diagnostic yields in these groups were 93.9 and 66.7%, respectively. Neither differences between needle passes nor complications were noted. The sensitivity and specificity were 93.5 and 100%, respectively, in the fine-needle biopsy Franseen group, versus 71 and 100%, respectively, in the reverse bevel needle group.
Conclusions: The Franseen needle was more effective for sampling pancreatic tumors than the reverse bevel needle.
Competing Interests: None of the authors declares conflicts of interest.
(Copyright © 2022 by Sociedade Portuguesa de Gastrenterologia. Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)