A Comparative Study of 22G versus 19G Needles for EUS-Guided Biopsies for Parenchymal Liver Disease: Are Thinner Needles Better?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Data on comparative efficacy of various available endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) needles are limited. We sought to compare the performance of a novel Franseen-tip 22G fine-needle biopsy (FNB) device to that of 19G needle platforms for liver parenchyma. METHODS: Consecutive patients referred for EUS and suspected to have hepatic parenchymal disease underwent EUS-LB using different EUS needles and were included in this retrospective study. Two blinded expert liver pathologists independently reviewed and reported on: total number of tissue fragments, length of longest fragment, number of complete and incomplete portal tracts (CPT and IPT), and specimen adequacy. RESULTS: A 22G Franseen-tip needle (A) was used in 30 patients; 19G Tru-Cut needle (B) in 50 patients; 19G reverse beveled non-Tru-Cut needle (C) in 27 patients; and a 19G flexible non-Tru-Cut needle (D) in 28 patients. In the order of needles, A, B, C and D, > 10 tissue fragments were obtained in 100%, 6%, 82%, and 96% samples, the mean number of CPTs was 6.9; 3.0; 7.3; and 16.9, length of longest fragment was 3.8, 4. 7, 3.9, and 8.4 mm, and specimen adequacy was 66.7%, 46%, 82.1%, and 81.5%, respectively. A positive correlation was obtained between number of CPTs and length of longest fragment in samples accrued by 19G needles. CONCLUSION: EUS-LB specimens using 22G Franseen-tip needle appear highly fragmented, leading to inferior specimen adequacy compared to 19G non-Tru-Cut needles. We also report on using length of longest fragment as an additional criterion for specimen adequacy as it positively correlates with number of CPTs standard.

Second-generation distal attachment cuff improves adenoma detection rate: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using the second-generation distal attachment cuff device (Endocuff Vision; Olympus America, Center Valley, Pa, USA) have reported conflicting results in improving adenoma detection rate (ADR) compared with standard high-definition colonoscopy without the distal attachment. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs to compare outcomes between second-generation cuff colonoscopy (CC) versus colonoscopy without the distal attachment (standard colonoscopy [SC]). METHODS: An electronic literature search was performed using PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase, and Cochrane Library through May 2020. The primary outcome was reporting of ADR, and secondary outcomes were polyp detection rate (PDR), mean withdrawal time, mean adenomas per colonoscopy (APC), sessile serrated lesion detection rate, and adverse events. Pooled rates and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals were reported. RESULTS: Eight RCTs with 5695 patients were included in the final analysis, with 2862 patients (mean age, 62.8 years; 52.9% men) in the CC group and 2833 patients (mean age, 62.6 years; 54.2% men) in the SC group. Compared with SC, use of CC was associated with a significant improvement in ADR (49.8% vs 45.6%, respectively; RR, 1.12; P = .02), PDR (58.1% vs 53%, respectively; RR, 1.12; P = .009), and APC (P < .01). Furthermore, use of CC had a .93-minute lower mean withdrawal time (P < .01) when compared with SC. The difference in ADR was larger in the screening/surveillance population (6.5%, P = .02) and when used by endoscopists with ADRs <30% (9.4%, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this meta-analysis of randomized trials show a significant improvement in ADR and APC with shorter withdrawal times using the second-generation cuff device compared with SC.