Randomized study comparing endoscopic ultrasound-guided Trucut biopsy and fine needle aspiration with high suction.

OBJECTIVES: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided Trucut biopsy (TCB) enables acquisition of tissue cores for histological assessment. Because of the rigid needle and the spring mechanism, tissue acquisition can be difficult from regions that require sharp angulation of the echoendoscope. Fine needle aspiration with high suction (FNAHS) has been proposed as a method to obtain histological tissue cores while affording the flexibility to obtain specimens even with extreme endoscope angulation. The objective was to compare prospectively these two methods in their ability to obtain specimens for histological assessment and in their diagnostic accuracy, including cytological diagnosis when achieved. METHODS: Eighty lesions in 77 patients were amenable to transoesophageal, transgastric or transrectal biopsy and were randomized to TCB (n = 44) or FNAHS (n = 36). Each specimen was assessed for adequacy (scoring system where a score of 0 was no material, 1-2 was considered cytological, and 3-5 was considered histological). Follow-up information was obtained to establish a gold standard final diagnosis. RESULTS: The median histological scores for FNAHS and TCB were 2 and 5, respectively. Histological cores were obtained in 95.3% of TCB, as opposed to 27.8% in the FNAHS group (P < 0.0001). Although the diagnostic accuracy for TCB was greater than that for FNAHS (88.3% and 77.8%, respectively), this was not statistically significant (P = 0.24). CONCLUSION: If histological information is required, TCB is superior to FNAHS. The difference in diagnostic accuracy did not reach statistical significance due to low numbers and the fact that FNAHS often enabled a cytological diagnosis.