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
Review
. 2024 Aug;36(8):871-883.
doi: 10.1111/den.14768. Epub 2024 Mar 3.

Consensus statements on endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition. Guidelines from the Asian Endoscopic Ultrasound Group

Charing Ching-Ning Chong  1 , Rapat Pittayanon  2 , Nonthalee Pausawasdi  3 , Vikram Bhatia  4 , Nozomi Okuno  5 , Raymond Shing-Yan Tang  6 , Tsu-Yao Cheng  7 , Yu-Ting Kuo  8 , Dongwook Oh  9 , Tae Jun Song  9 , Tae Hyeon Kim  10 , Kazuo Hara  5 , Anthony Wing-Hung Chan  11 , Howard Ho Wai Leung  11 , Aiming Yang  12 , Zhendong Jin  13 , Can Xu  13 , Sundeep Lakhtakia  14 , Hsiu-Po Wang  8 , Dong-Wan Seo  10 , Anthony Yuen-Bun Teoh  1 , Lawrence Khek-Yu Ho  15 , Mitsuhiro Kida  16
Affiliations
Review

Consensus statements on endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition. Guidelines from the Asian Endoscopic Ultrasound Group

Charing Ching-Ning Chong et al. Dig Endosc. 2024 Aug.

Erratum in

Abstract

Objectives: This consensus was developed by the Asian EUS Group (AEG), who aimed to formulate a set of practice guidelines addressing various aspects of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA).

Methods: The AEG initiated the development of consensus statements and formed an expert panel comprising surgeons, gastroenterologists, and pathologists. Three online consensus meetings were conducted to consolidate the statements and votes. The statements were presented and discussed in the first two consensus meetings and revised according to comments. Final voting was conducted at a third consensus meeting. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was adopted to define the strength of the recommendations and quality of evidence.

Results: A total of 20 clinical questions and statements regarding EUS-TA were formulated. The committee recommended that fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles be preferred over conventional fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needles for EUS-TA of subepithelial lesions. For solid pancreatic masses, rapid on-site evaluation is not routinely recommended when FNB needles are used. For dedicated FNB needles, fork-tip and Franseen-tip needles have essentially equivalent performance.

Conclusion: This consensus provides guidance for EUS-TA, thereby enhancing the quality of EUS-TA.

Keywords: endoscopic ultrasound; fine‐needle aspiration; fine‐needle biopsy; guidelines; tissue acquisition.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Polkowski M, Jenssen C, Kaye P et al. Technical aspects of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)‐guided sampling in gastroenterology: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) technical guideline – March 2017. Endoscopy 2017; 49: 989–1006.
    1. Jenssen C, Hocke M, Fusaroli P et al. EFSUMB guidelines on interventional ultrasound (INVUS), part IV – EUS‐guided interventions: General aspects and EUS‐guided sampling (short version). Ultraschall Med 2016; 37: 157–169.
    1. Chung MJ, Park SW, Kim SH et al. Clinical and technical guideline for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)‐guided tissue acquisition of pancreatic solid tumor: Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE). Gut Liver 2021; 15: 354–374.
    1. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE et al. GRADE: An emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008; 336: 924–926.
    1. Carrara S, Anderloni A, Jovani M et al. A prospective randomized study comparing 25‐g and 22‐g needles of a new platform for endoscopic ultrasound‐guided fine needle aspiration of solid masses. Dig Liver Dis 2016; 48: 49–54.

LinkOut - more resources