Dry Suction Versus Wet Suction of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy for Diagnosis of Solid Pancreatic Lesions: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Noninferiority Trial.

Journal: The American Journal Of Gastroenterology
Published:
Abstract

Background: Conclusions regarding the suction techniques of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) remain controversial. This study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the dry suction vs wet suction technique in solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs) and determine the optimal number of passes for EUS-FNB.

Methods: This investigation was conducted as a multicenter, randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial. Patients with SPLs were randomly allocated to receive either the dry or wet suction technique. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy. The secondary outcomes included sensitivity, specificity, optimal number of needle passes, specimen quality, procedure time, and adverse events.

Results: Of the 200 patients, 193 were included in the final analysis, with 96 in the dry suction group and 97 in the wet suction group. The diagnostic accuracies were 97.92% and 96.91% in the dry and wet groups, respectively, with a 1.01% difference between the study groups (2-sided 95% CI, -3.47% to 5.48%, P = 0.659). The overall adverse event rate was 2.6%. No significant differences were observed in sample adequacy (98.9% vs 98.9%, P = 1) or blood contamination ( P = 0.796). Regarding procedure time, there was no statistical difference (18.68 ± 8.03 minutes vs 19.36 ± 8.89 minutes, P = 0.626); however, more procedural steps were required in the wet suction technique. No significant difference was found between the cumulative diagnostic accuracy of each needle (first pass 93.78% vs second pass 95.34% vs third pass 97.41%, P = 0.225).

Conclusions: The dry suction technique is noninferior to the wet suction technique for EUS-FNB in SPLs. In the absence of rapid on-site evaluation, only one pass was required to achieve more than 90% diagnostic accuracy ( ClinicalTrial.gov number NCT05549856).

Authors
Shenglin Xu, Jianian Guo, Mengbin Qin, Yiteng Meng, Fang Xie, Weiguang Qiao, Haiyan Hu, Peng Peng, Jahan Rownoak, Socheat Heng, Finang Ung, Yaping Ye, Jing Wang, Weixin Li, Yingying Zou, Li Zou, Shaohui Huang, Side Liu, Junfen Wang, Jun Yao, Yue Li
Relevant Conditions

Endoscopy