EUS Needle Identification Comparison and Evaluation study (with videos).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS-guided FNA or biopsy sampling is widely practiced. Optimal sonographic visualization of the needle is critical for image-guided interventions. Of the several commercially available needles, bench-top testing and direct comparison of these needles have not been done to reveal their inherent echogenicity. The aims are to provide bench-top data that can be used to guide clinical applications and to promote future device research and development. METHODS: Descriptive bench-top testing and comparison of 8 commonly used EUS-FNA needles (all size 22 gauge): SonoTip Pro Control (Medi-Globe); Expect Slimline (Boston Scientific); EchoTip, EchoTip Ultra, EchoTip ProCore High Definition (Cook Medical); ClearView (Conmed); EZ Shot 2 (Olympus); and BNX (Beacon Endoscopic), and 2 new prototype needles, SonoCoat (Medi-Globe), coated by echogenic polymers made by Encapson. Blinded evaluation of standardized and unedited videos by 43 EUS endoscopists and 17 radiologists specialized in GI US examination who were unfamiliar with EUS needle devices. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the ratings and rankings of these needles between endosonographers and radiologists. Overall, 1 prototype needle was rated as the best, ranking 10% to 40% higher than all other needles (P < .01). Among the commercially available needles, the EchoTip Ultra needle and the ClearView needle were top choices. The EZ Shot 2 needle was ranked statistically lower than other needles (30%-75% worse, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: All FNA needles have their inherent and different echogenicities, and these differences are similarly recognized by EUS endoscopists and radiologists. Needles with polymeric coating from the entire shaft to the needle tip may offer better echogenicity.

Portal vein thrombosis: A concise review (Review).

Portal vein thrombosis (PVT) is a frequent complication in cirrhotic patients, but it may also exist as a basic vascular condition even without any liver damage. Local and systemic factors play a significant role in the pathogenesis of PVT; yet, in practice, more than one factor may be identified. PVT can be considered a result of liver fibrosis and hepatic insufficiency. The JAK2 mutation has been accepted as a factor producing PVT. In general, the anticoagulants are recommended but this therapy should be used carefully in treating patients that associate coagulopathy or thrombocytopenia and esophageal varices. Acute PVT without bowel infarction has a good prognosis. In liver cirrhosis, the mortality due to hemorrhage is higher than in chronic PVT. Therefore, for the patients with PVT, the survival rate is decreased by 55% in two years, due to hepatic insufficiency. Regarding the treatment, LMWH (low molecular weight heparine) is the most utilized in patients with cirrhosis, non-malignancies, infections, or those who are awaiting a liver transplant. DOACs (direct-acting oral anticoagulants) may be used in the rest of the medical conditions, being safe and equal to LMWH.