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

BACKGROUND: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.

Obesity and age are transmission risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection among exposed individuals.

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has occurred in Massachusetts in multiple waves led by a series of emerging variants. While the evidence has linked obesity with severe symptoms of COVID-19, the effect of obesity on susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 infection remains unclear. Identification of intrinsic factors, which increase the likelihood of exposed individuals succumbing to productive SARS-CoV-2 infection could help plan mitigation efforts to curb the illness. We aim to investigate whether obese individuals have a higher susceptibility to developing productive SARS-CoV-2 infection given comparable exposure to nonobese individuals. This case-control study leveraged data from the Mass General Brigham's (MGB) electronic medical records (EMR), containing 687,813 patients, to determine whether obesity at any age increases the proportion of infections. We used PCR results of 72,613 subjects who tested positive to SARS-CoV-2 or declared exposure to the virus independently of the result of the test. For this study, we defined susceptibility as the likelihood of testing positive upon suspected exposure. We demonstrate evidence that SARS-CoV-2 exposed obese individuals were more prone to become COVID positive than nonobese individuals [adjusted odds ratio = 1.34 (95% CI: 1.29-1.39)]. Temporal analysis showed significantly increased susceptibility in obese individuals across the duration of the pandemic in Massachusetts. Obese exposed individuals are at a higher risk of getting infected with SARS-CoV-2. This indicates that obesity is not only a risk factor for worsened outcomes but also increases the risk for infection upon exposure. Identifying such populations early will be crucial for curbing the spread of this infectious disease.