Comparison of conventional and ultrasound-guided needle biopsy techniques in the diagnosis of sarcoidosis: a randomized trial

Abstract

Introduction: Endoscopic biopsy techniques are useful in the diagnosis of sarcoidosis. There is a need for randomized trials to establish where these procedures fit in the diagnosis of sarcoidosis.

Objectives: The aim of the study was to compare the diagnostic yield of conventional transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA) with endobronchial ultrasound-guided TBNA (EBUS-TBNA) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in stages I and II of pulmonary sarcoidosis.

Patients and methods: Patients suspected of sarcoidosis were randomized to undergo TBNA or EBUS-TBNA or EUS-FNA. Patients with negative TBNA and EBUS-TBNA results underwent EUS-FNA and those with negative EUS-FNA results—EBUS-TBNA. If both tests were negative, patients in stage I were scheduled for mediastinoscopy (MS) and those in stage II—for transbronchial lung biopsy (TBLB).

Results: In 100 patients, 34 TBNA, 30 EBUS-TBNA, and 36 EUS-FNA procedures were performed at baseline. TBNA was positive in 20 patients (58.8%); EBUS-TBNA, in 23 (76.7%); and EUS-FNA, in 31 patients (86.1%). In patients with negative biopsy results, the second procedure was performed. The results of EUS-FNA were positive in 9 patients and of EBUS-TBNA—in none. Of 17 patients with negative results of both procedures, MS was performed in 6 patients and was positive in 2. In the remaining 11 patients, sarcoidosis was confirmed by TBLB. Sensitivity and accuracy of TBNA compared with EBUS-TBNA and EUS-FNA were 62.5% and 64.7%, 79.3% and 80%, and 88.6% and 88.9%, respectively. Sensitivity and accuracy of EBUS-TBNA were higher (P = 0.139) and of EUS-FNA were significantly higher compared with TBNA (P = 0.012).

Conclusions: In stages I and II of pulmonary sarcoidosis, endoscopic ultrasound is a reasonable approach but EUS-FNA seems to be the method of choice.