Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2015 Jan;44(1):128-33.
doi: 10.1097/MPA.0000000000000217.

Randomized Trial Comparing the Flexible 19G and 25G Needles for Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration of Solid Pancreatic Mass Lesions

Jayapal Ramesh  1 , Ji Young Bang, Shantel Hebert-Magee, Jessica Trevino, Isam Eltoum, Andra Frost, Muhammad K Hasan, Amy Logue, Robert Hawes, Shyam Varadarajulu
Affiliations
Free PMC article
Randomized Controlled Trial

Randomized Trial Comparing the Flexible 19G and 25G Needles for Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration of Solid Pancreatic Mass Lesions

Jayapal Ramesh et al. Pancreas. 2015 Jan.
Free PMC article

Retraction in

Abstract

Objectives: Although a large gauge needle can procure more tissue at endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), its advantage over smaller needles is unclear. This study compared flexible 19G and 25G needles for EUS-FNA of solid pancreatic masses.

Methods: This was a randomized trial of patients undergoing EUS-FNA of pancreatic masses using flexible 19G or 25G needle. Main outcome measure was to compare median number of passes for on-site diagnosis. Secondary measures were to compare specimen bloodiness, complications, technical failures, and histological core tissue procurement.

Results: One hundred patients were randomized to EUS-FNA using flexible 19G or 25G needle. Median of 1 pass was required to achieve on-site diagnosis of 96% and 92% (P = 0.68) in 19G and 25G cohorts. There was no significant difference in technical failure (0% vs 2%, P = 0.99) or adverse events (2% vs 0%, P = 0.99) between 19G and 25G cohorts. Although histological core tissue procurement was significantly better with flexible 19G needle (88% vs 44%, P < 0.001), specimens were bloodier (severe bloodiness, 36% vs 4%; P < 0.001).

Conclusions: As there is no significant difference in the performance of flexible 19G and 25G needles, needle choice for sampling pancreatic masses should be based on endoscopist preference and need for histology.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Flow diagram of the study results.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Camellini L, Carlinfante G, Azzolini F, et al. A randomized clinical trial comparing 22G and 25G needles in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of solid lesions. Endoscopy. 2011; 43: 709– 715. - PubMed
    1. Fabbri C, Polifemo AM, Luigiano C, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration with 22- and 25-gauge needles in solid pancreatic masses: a prospective comparative study with randomisation of needle sequence. Dig Liver Dis. 2011; 43: 647– 652. - PubMed
    1. Siddiqui UD, Rossi F, Rosenthal LS, et al. EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses: a prospective, randomized trial comparing 22-gauge and 25-gauge needles. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009; 70: 1093– 1097. - PubMed
    1. Madhoun MF, Wani SB, Rastogi A, et al. The diagnostic accuracy of 22-gauge and 25-gauge needles in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: a meta-analysis. Endoscopy. 2013; 45: 86– 92. - PubMed
    1. Levy MJ. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided Trucut biopsy of the pancreas: prospects and problems. Pancreatology. 2007; 7: 163– 166. - PubMed

MeSH terms