Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Digestive Diseases and Sciences 4/2013

01-04-2013 | Original Article

Needle Size Has Only a Limited Effect on Outcomes in EUS-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Authors: Kajsa E. Affolter, Robert L. Schmidt, Anna P. Matynia, Douglas G. Adler, Rachel E. Factor

Published in: Digestive Diseases and Sciences | Issue 4/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Several recent studies have investigated the utility of 19-, 22-, and 25-gauge needles in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS–FNA) of pancreatic and peri-pancreatic tumors.

Aim

The objective of this study was to summarize data from these studies and estimate the effect of needle size on reported outcomes such as accuracy, adequacy, and complications.

Methods

Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the effect of needle size (19, 22, and 25G) on diagnostic accuracy, adequacy, number of needle passes, and complications.

Results

25G appear to confer an advantage in adequacy rates relative to 22G needles (risk difference = 0.12 %, 95 % CI 0.01, 0.25). There was no significant difference in accuracy with an overall sensitivity and specificity for 22G being 0.78 (95 % CI 0.74–0.81) and 1.00 (95 % CI 0.98–1.00) and an overall sensitivity and specificity for 25G being 0.91 (95 % CI 0.87–0.94) and 1.00 (95 % CI 0.97–1.00). There was no difference in number of passes or complications between 25 and 22G. The limited data available regarding 19G needles do not show evidence of improved outcomes with these devices.

Conclusions

In the evaluation of pancreatic and peri-pancreatic lesions by EUS–FNA, 25G needles may confer an advantage in adequacy relative to 22G needles but confer no advantages with respect to accuracy, number of passes, or complications.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Fabbri C, Polifemo AM, Luigiano C, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration with 22- and 25-gauge needles in solid pancreatic masses: a prospective comparative study with randomisation of needle sequence. Dig Liver Dis. 2011;43:647–652.PubMedCrossRef Fabbri C, Polifemo AM, Luigiano C, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration with 22- and 25-gauge needles in solid pancreatic masses: a prospective comparative study with randomisation of needle sequence. Dig Liver Dis. 2011;43:647–652.PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Schmidt RL, Factor RE, Affolter KE, et al. Methods specification for diagnostic test accuracy studies in fine-needle aspiration cytology: a survey of reporting practice. Am J Clin Pathol. 2012;137:132–141.PubMedCrossRef Schmidt RL, Factor RE, Affolter KE, et al. Methods specification for diagnostic test accuracy studies in fine-needle aspiration cytology: a survey of reporting practice. Am J Clin Pathol. 2012;137:132–141.PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Camellini L, Carlinfante G, Azzolini F, et al. A randomized clinical trial comparing 22G and 25G needles in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of solid lesions. Endoscopy. 2011;43:709–715.PubMedCrossRef Camellini L, Carlinfante G, Azzolini F, et al. A randomized clinical trial comparing 22G and 25G needles in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of solid lesions. Endoscopy. 2011;43:709–715.PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Yusuf TE, Ho S, Pavey DA, Michael H, Gress FG. Retrospective analysis of the utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS–FNA) in pancreatic masses, using a 22-gauge or 25-gauge needle system: a multicenter experience. Endoscopy. 2009;41:445–448.PubMedCrossRef Yusuf TE, Ho S, Pavey DA, Michael H, Gress FG. Retrospective analysis of the utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS–FNA) in pancreatic masses, using a 22-gauge or 25-gauge needle system: a multicenter experience. Endoscopy. 2009;41:445–448.PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference 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;70:1093–1097.PubMedCrossRef 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;70:1093–1097.PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Song TJ, Kim JH, Lee SS, et al. The prospective randomized, controlled trial of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration using 22G and 19G aspiration needles for solid pancreatic or peripancreatic masses. Am J Gastroenterol. 2010;105:1739–1745.PubMedCrossRef Song TJ, Kim JH, Lee SS, et al. The prospective randomized, controlled trial of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration using 22G and 19G aspiration needles for solid pancreatic or peripancreatic masses. Am J Gastroenterol. 2010;105:1739–1745.PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Sakamoto H, Kitano M, Komaki T, 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;24:384–390.PubMedCrossRef Sakamoto H, Kitano M, Komaki T, 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;24:384–390.PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Imazu H, Uchiyama Y, Kakutani H, et al. A prospective comparison of EUS-guided FNA using 25-gauge and 22-gauge needles. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2009;2009:Article ID 546390. Imazu H, Uchiyama Y, Kakutani H, et al. A prospective comparison of EUS-guided FNA using 25-gauge and 22-gauge needles. Gastroenterol Res Pract. 2009;2009:Article ID 546390.
9.
go back to reference Lee JH, Stewart J, Ross WA, Anandasabapathy S, Xiao L, Staerkel G. Blinded prospective comparison of the performance of 22-gauge and 25-gauge needles in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of the pancreas and peri-pancreatic lesions. Dig Dis Sci. 2009;54:2274–2281.PubMedCrossRef Lee JH, Stewart J, Ross WA, Anandasabapathy S, Xiao L, Staerkel G. Blinded prospective comparison of the performance of 22-gauge and 25-gauge needles in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of the pancreas and peri-pancreatic lesions. Dig Dis Sci. 2009;54:2274–2281.PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Othman MO, Raimondo M. Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration of pancreatic lesions: Is a smaller needle safer and better? Dig Liver Dis. 2011;43:587–588.PubMedCrossRef Othman MO, Raimondo M. Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration of pancreatic lesions: Is a smaller needle safer and better? Dig Liver Dis. 2011;43:587–588.PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Gerke H. EUS-guided FNA: better samples with smaller needles? Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;70:1098–1100.PubMedCrossRef Gerke H. EUS-guided FNA: better samples with smaller needles? Gastrointest Endosc. 2009;70:1098–1100.PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Siddiqui UD, Aslanian HR. For EUS-Guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses, bigger is not always better. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011;106:801–802.PubMedCrossRef Siddiqui UD, Aslanian HR. For EUS-Guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses, bigger is not always better. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011;106:801–802.PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Yoshinaga S, Suzuki H, Oda I, Saito Y. Role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS–FNA) for diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses. Dig Endosc. 2011;23:29–33.PubMedCrossRef Yoshinaga S, Suzuki H, Oda I, Saito Y. Role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS–FNA) for diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses. Dig Endosc. 2011;23:29–33.PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Itoi T, Itokawa F, Sofuni A, et al. Puncture of solid pancreatic tumors guided by endoscopic ultrasonography: a pilot study series comparing trucut and 19-gauge and 22-gauge aspiration needles. Endoscopy. 2005;37:362–366.PubMedCrossRef Itoi T, Itokawa F, Sofuni A, et al. Puncture of solid pancreatic tumors guided by endoscopic ultrasonography: a pilot study series comparing trucut and 19-gauge and 22-gauge aspiration needles. Endoscopy. 2005;37:362–366.PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Leeflang MM, Deeks JJ, Gatsonis C, Bossuyt PM, Cochrane Diagnostic Test Accuracy Working Group. Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:889–897.PubMed Leeflang MM, Deeks JJ, Gatsonis C, Bossuyt PM, Cochrane Diagnostic Test Accuracy Working Group. Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy. Ann Intern Med. 2008;149:889–897.PubMed
17.
go back to reference Harbord RM, Whiting P. Metandi: meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy using hierarchical logistic regression. Stata J.. 2009;9:211–229. Harbord RM, Whiting P. Metandi: meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy using hierarchical logistic regression. Stata J.. 2009;9:211–229.
18.
go back to reference Higgins JPT, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002;21:1539–1558.PubMedCrossRef Higgins JPT, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002;21:1539–1558.PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Siddiqui AA, Lyles T, Avula H, Davila R. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic masses in a veteran population: comparison of results with 22- and 25-gauge needles [letter to the editor]. Pancreas. 2010;39:685–686. Siddiqui AA, Lyles T, Avula H, Davila R. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic masses in a veteran population: comparison of results with 22- and 25-gauge needles [letter to the editor]. Pancreas. 2010;39:685–686.
20.
go back to reference Kida M, Araki M, Miyazawa S, et al. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration with 22- and 25-gauge needles in the same patients. J Interv Gastroenterol. 2011;1:102–107.PubMed Kida M, Araki M, Miyazawa S, et al. Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration with 22- and 25-gauge needles in the same patients. J Interv Gastroenterol. 2011;1:102–107.PubMed
21.
go back to reference Whiting PF, Rutjes AWS, Westwood ME, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155:529–536.PubMed Whiting PF, Rutjes AWS, Westwood ME, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Intern Med. 2011;155:529–536.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Needle Size Has Only a Limited Effect on Outcomes in EUS-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Authors
Kajsa E. Affolter
Robert L. Schmidt
Anna P. Matynia
Douglas G. Adler
Rachel E. Factor
Publication date
01-04-2013
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Digestive Diseases and Sciences / Issue 4/2013
Print ISSN: 0163-2116
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2568
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-012-2439-2

Other articles of this Issue 4/2013

Digestive Diseases and Sciences 4/2013 Go to the issue
Live Webinar | 27-06-2024 | 18:00 (CEST)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Live: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

WHO estimates that half of all patients worldwide are non-adherent to their prescribed medication. The consequences of poor adherence can be catastrophic, on both the individual and population level.

Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.

Prof. Kevin Dolgin
Prof. Florian Limbourg
Prof. Anoop Chauhan
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Obesity Clinical Trial Summary

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.

Developed by: Springer Medicine

Highlights from the ACC 2024 Congress

Year in Review: Pediatric cardiology

Watch Dr. Anne Marie Valente present the last year's highlights in pediatric and congenital heart disease in the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Pulmonary vascular disease

The last year's highlights in pulmonary vascular disease are presented by Dr. Jane Leopold in this official video from ACC.24.

Year in Review: Valvular heart disease

Watch Prof. William Zoghbi present the last year's highlights in valvular heart disease from the official ACC.24 Year in Review session.

Year in Review: Heart failure and cardiomyopathies

Watch this official video from ACC.24. Dr. Biykem Bozkurt discusses last year's major advances in heart failure and cardiomyopathies.