Influence of different sample processing methods on yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1007-5232.2009.07.003
- VernacularTitle:内镜超声引导下细针穿刺抽吸术不同处理标本方法对诊断结果的影响
- Author:
Hang ZHAO
;
Xianbao ZHAN
;
Zhaoshen LI
;
Zhendong JIN
;
Duowu ZOU
;
Xiaohua MAN
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Endoscopic uhrasonography;
Biopsy,fine-needle;
Cytology
- From:
Chinese Journal of Digestive Endoscopy
2009;26(7):344-347
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To compare the yield of endoscopic ultrasonography guided fine needle aspira-tion (EUS-FNA) with 3 different sample processing methods. Methods The clinical data of 118 patients, who underwent EUS-FNA performed by one physician from February 2005 to September 2008, were retrospectively analyzed. The FNA sample processing methods included liquid-based cytology, on-site cytology and smear method. The pathological diagnosis was classified as definite, suspicious malignancy, dissatisfying sampling and indefinite. Results The success rate of obtaining samples through on-site cytological procedure was 95.2% (40/42), which was significantly higher than that of conventional smear (32/47, 68%, P <0. 05), and was higher than that of liquid-based cytological method (26/29, 89. 7% ), but without significant differ-ence (P>0.05). The yield of definite diagnosis with liquid-based cytology and on-site cytology were 82.8% (24/29) and 78. 6% (33/42), respectively, which were both significantly higher than that of smear method (57. 4%, 27/47, P <0. 05). The sensitivity and accuracy of on-site cytology were higher than those of smear method and liquid-based cytology, but without significant differences (P >0. 05). Conclusion Compared with conventional smear method, an-site cytology and liquid-based cytology yield more results from EUS-FNA.
