PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: The benefits of rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of solid masses have not been convincingly shown in large, randomized trials. New equipment using EUS-guided fine needle biopsy (FNB) allows for more material to be acquired that may obviate the need for ROSE. This study aimed to evaluate if EUS-FNB without ROSE was non-inferior to EUS-FNA with ROSE in solid pancreatic masses (SPMs).
UNASSIGNED: Patients with SPMs requiring tissue sampling were randomly assigned to undergo either EUS-FNA with ROSE or EUS-FNB without ROSE. The touch-imprint cytology technique was used to perform ROSE. The primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy and secondary endpoints were specimen quality, complication rates, and procedure time.
UNASSIGNED: Seventy-eight patients were randomized and analyzed (39 EUS-FNA with ROSE and 39 EUS-FNB without ROSE). Non-significantly different diagnostic accuracies were noted in both groups (97% with ROSE and 100% without ROSE, P < 0.371). The bloodiness of histologic samples and complication rates were not significantly different between groups. A significantly shorter mean sampling procedural time was noted for EUS-FNB over EUS-FNA with ROSE (30.4 ± 10.4 vs 35.8 ± 9.8 minutes, P < .02).
UNASSIGNED: EUS-FNB demonstrated equal diagnostic accuracy with shorter procedure times in evaluating SPMs compared to EUS-FNA with ROSE. These new-generation FNB needles may obviate the need for ROSE.
UNASSIGNED: Patients with SPMs requiring tissue sampling were randomly assigned to undergo either EUS-FNA with ROSE or EUS-FNB without ROSE. The touch-imprint cytology technique was used to perform ROSE. The primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy and secondary endpoints were specimen quality, complication rates, and procedure time.
UNASSIGNED: Seventy-eight patients were randomized and analyzed (39 EUS-FNA with ROSE and 39 EUS-FNB without ROSE). Non-significantly different diagnostic accuracies were noted in both groups (97% with ROSE and 100% without ROSE, P < 0.371). The bloodiness of histologic samples and complication rates were not significantly different between groups. A significantly shorter mean sampling procedural time was noted for EUS-FNB over EUS-FNA with ROSE (30.4 ± 10.4 vs 35.8 ± 9.8 minutes, P < .02).
UNASSIGNED: EUS-FNB demonstrated equal diagnostic accuracy with shorter procedure times in evaluating SPMs compared to EUS-FNA with ROSE. These new-generation FNB needles may obviate the need for ROSE.
摘要：
■快速现场评估（ROSE）超声内镜引导下细针穿刺（EUS-FNA）的实性肿块的益处尚未得到令人信服的证明，随机试验。使用EUS引导的细针活检（FNB）的新设备可以获取更多的材料，从而可以避免对ROSE的需求。本研究旨在评估无ROSE的EUS-FNB在胰腺实性肿块（SPM）中是否不劣于有ROSE的EUS-FNA。
■需要组织取样的SPM患者被随机分配接受ROSE的EUS-FNA或不ROSE的EUS-FNB。使用触摸印迹细胞学技术进行ROSE。主要终点是诊断准确性，次要终点是标本质量，并发症发生率,和程序时间。
■对78例患者进行随机分析（39例EUS-FNA伴ROSE，39例EUS-FNB不伴ROSE）。两组的诊断准确率无显著差异(97%有ROSE,100%无ROSE,P<0.371)。组织学样本的血液性和并发症发生率在两组之间没有显着差异。EUS-FNB的平均采样程序时间明显短于ROSE的EUS-FNA（30.4±10.4vs35.8±9.8分钟，P<.02)。与使用ROSE的EUS-FNA相比，
■EUS-FNB在评估SPM时表现出相同的诊断准确性和较短的手术时间。这些新一代FNB针可以消除对ROSE的需要。
■需要组织取样的SPM患者被随机分配接受ROSE的EUS-FNA或不ROSE的EUS-FNB。使用触摸印迹细胞学技术进行ROSE。主要终点是诊断准确性，次要终点是标本质量，并发症发生率,和程序时间。
■对78例患者进行随机分析（39例EUS-FNA伴ROSE，39例EUS-FNB不伴ROSE）。两组的诊断准确率无显著差异(97%有ROSE,100%无ROSE,P<0.371)。组织学样本的血液性和并发症发生率在两组之间没有显着差异。EUS-FNB的平均采样程序时间明显短于ROSE的EUS-FNA（30.4±10.4vs35.8±9.8分钟，P<.02)。与使用ROSE的EUS-FNA相比，
■EUS-FNB在评估SPM时表现出相同的诊断准确性和较短的手术时间。这些新一代FNB针可以消除对ROSE的需要。
