EUS-guided fine-needle core liver biopsy with a modified one-pass, one-actuation wet suction technique comparing two types of EUS core needles.

Background and study aims We compared the diagnostic yield and specimen adequacy in EUS-guided parenchymal biopsies between two types of EUS 19 G core needles. Patients and methods This is a retrospective study of 420 patients at two tertiary medical centers in Florida with unexplained abnormal liver associated tests were referred for EUS evaluation of biliary obstruction and pancreatic pathology. EUS-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) was performed at the same session after biliary obstruction was excluded. We compared intact specimen length (ISL), total specimen length (TSL), complete portal triads (CPT) and adverse events (AE). Welch's T and Tukey tests were used for ISL, TSL and CPT. Results A total of 210 patients underwent EUS-LB using a Franseen needle, 210 patients using a fork-tip needle. Median patient age was 52 years (15.63) and 238 (56.7 %) were female. The fork-tip needle had a mean ISL of 2.7 (1.1 SD) cm, TSL of 6 cm (2.1 SD), and mean 19.5 CPT (8.5 SD) Abdominal pain occurred in 35 patients (17 %) post-procedure and was managed with supportive care. Two patients required intravenous (IV) narcotic administration. Subcapsular hematomas occurred in 1 (0.5 %) patients. The Franseen needle had a mean ISL of 3.1 cm (1.3 SD), TSL of 6.5 cm (2.6 SD), and mean of 24 CPT (8.8 SD). Abdominal pain occurred in four patients (2 %) post-procedure, which resolved in all patients after IV narcotic administration. Subcapsular hematomas occurred in 1 (0.5 %) and bile leak in 1(0.4 %) patients. Conclusions Use of the Franseen needle resulted in better liver core samples than that obtained with a fork-tip needle.

Influence of race and sex on prevalence and recurrence of colon polyps.

BACKGROUND: African Americans (AAs) have a higher incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) and present with more advanced disease compared with whites. An increased prevalence of polyps has also been noted in men regardless of race. We sought to validate these observations and assess whether the increase in CRC in AAs is owing to polyp prevalence or incidence differences vs other factors. METHODS: A detailed endoscopy database was used to identify patients undergoing their first outpatient colonoscopy for screening or minimal symptoms from January 26, 1996, through September 19, 2006. Multivariate models were constructed to predict prevalence and incidence of polyps. RESULTS: Of individuals undergoing colonoscopies, 3732 met our study criteria (41.3% male and 29.2% AA); 761 (20.4%) had polyps. Male sex (odds ratio, 1.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.39-2.02) independently predicted polyps but race did not. A random 100-patient sample showed no significant racial difference in the proportion of adenomatous polyps among those with polyps (68.0% white vs 60.0% AA, P = .60). Of 57 patients who had a follow-up colonoscopy a median of 3.6 years after their index procedure, 18 (31.6%) were male, 7 (12.3%) were AA, and 19 (33.3%) were older than 65 years. Thirty-five (61.4%) had a polyp recurrence. Adjusting for time to subsequent colonoscopy and other confounders, neither male sex (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.43-2.21) nor race (1.89; 0.68-5.24) significantly predicted incidence of recurrent polyps. CONCLUSIONS: In this series, male sex but not race predicted prevalence of polyps. Incidence of recurrent polyps was higher in neither male patients nor AAs, but the power of this analysis is limited.