Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Effectiveness of Menghini-Type Needles for Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration of Pancreatic Masses

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Digestive Diseases and Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Cutting needles are thought to be effective as biopsy needles. A few types of cutting needles are available for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), and the Menghini-type needle is an end-type cutting needle.

Aims

A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted to compare the results of EUS-FNA using a Menghini-type needle (needle M) versus a conventional needle (needle S).

Methods

The main eligibility criteria were as follows: patients with a pancreatic mass referred for EUS-FNA, ≥ 20 years old, and a performance status < 4. The primary outcome was the sample quality. The secondary outcomes were factors associated with the sample quality, diagnostic accuracy, and adverse events.

Results

A total of 97 patients were enrolled in this study. The sample quality for total puncture with needle M (92.8%) was significantly higher than that with needle S (81.4%) (p = 0.0305). The tumor size (p = 0.033) and type of needle (p = 0.031) were significant factors associated with adequate tissue collection in univariate and multivariate analyses (odds ratio [OR] 2.71; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.12–6.54; p = 0.027 for tumor size, and OR 2.93; 95% CI 1.23–8.21; p = 0.0153 for type of needle). The diagnostic accuracy of each needle was 88.7% (86/97) with needle M and 73.2% (71/97) with needle S. Adverse events occurred in 2 of the 97 patients (0.02%).

Conclusion

A Menghini-type needle was able to obtain core tissue for histology more effectively than a conventional aspiration needle.

Trial Registration Numbers

UMIN registration number of 000020668.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

EUS-FNA:

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration

NET:

Neuroendocrine tumors

SPN:

Solid pseudopapillary neoplasms

EUS-FNB:

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy

EUS:

Endoscopic ultrasound

BMI:

Body mass index

GIST:

Gastrointestinal stromal tumor

References

  1. Abe Y, Kawakami H, Oba K, et al. Effect of a stylet on a histological specimen in EUS-guided fine-needle tissue acquisition by using 22-gauge needles: a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;82:837–844.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Armellini E, Manfrin E, Trisolini E, et al. Histologic retrieval rate of a newly designed side-bevelled 20G needle for EUS-guided tissue acquisition of solid pancreatic lesions. United Eur Gastroenterol J. 2019;7:96–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Di Leo M, Crino SF, Bernardoni L, et al. EUS-guided core biopsies of pancreatic solid masses using a new fork-tip needle: a multicenter prospective study. Dig Liver Dis. 2019;51:1275–1280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bang JY, Hebert-Magee S, Hasan MK, et al. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biopsy using a Franseen needle design: initial assessment. Dig Endosc. 2017;29:338–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kandel P, Tranesh G, Nassar A, et al. EUS-guided fine needle biopsy sampling using a novel fork-tip needle: a case-control study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2016;84:1034–1039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bang JY, Hawes R, Varadarajulu S. A meta-analysis comparing ProCore and standard fine-needle aspiration needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition. Endoscopy. 2016;48:339–349.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Wani S, Muthusamy VR, McGrath CM, et al. AGA white paper: optimizing endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition and future directions. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;16:318–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Birgi E, Ergun O, Turkmenoglu TT, et al. The contribution of vacuum-assisted modified Menghini type needle to diagnosis of US-guided fine needle aspiration biopsy of the thyroid. Diagn Interv Radiol. 2016;22:173–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Vargas-Tank L, Martinez V, Jiron MI, et al. Tru-cut and Menghini needles: different yield in the histological diagnosis of liver disease. Liver. 1985;5:178–181.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Oken MM, Creech RH, Tormey DC, et al. Toxicity and response criteria of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Am J Clin Oncol. 1982;5:649–655.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Cheng B, Zhang Y, Chen Q, et al. Analysis of fine-needle biopsy vs fine-needle aspiration in diagnosis of pancreatic and abdominal masses: a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018;16:1314–1321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gerke H, Rizk MK, Vanderheyden AD, et al. Randomized study comparing endoscopic ultrasound-guided Trucut biopsy and fine needle aspiration with high suction. Cytopathology. 2010;21:44–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Cotton PB, Eisen GM, Aabakken L, et al. A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: report of an ASGE workshop. Gastrointest Endosc. 2010;71:446–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Sakamoto H, Kitano M, Komaki T, et al. Prospective comparative study of the EUS guided 25-gauge FNA needle with the 19-gauge Trucut needle and 22-gauge FNA needle in patients with solid pancreatic masses. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009;24:384–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Itoi T, Sofuni A, Itokawa F, et al. Current status of diagnostic endoscopic ultrasonography in the evaluation of pancreatic mass lesions. Dig Endosc. 2011;23:17–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hewitt MJ, McPhail MJ, Possamai L, et al. EUS-guided FNA for diagnosis of solid pancreatic neoplasms: a meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;75:319–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Larson BK, Tuli R, Jamil LH, et al. Utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy for next-generation sequencing of pancreatic exocrine malignancies. Pancreas. 2018;47:990–995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Mukai S, Itoi T, Yamaguchi H, et al. A retrospective histological comparison of EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy using a novel franseen needle and a conventional end-cut type needle. Endosc Ultrasound. 2019;8:50–57.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Larsen MH, Fristrup CW, Detlefsen S, et al. Prospective evaluation of EUS-guided fine needle biopsy in pancreatic mass lesions. Endosc Int Open. 2018;6:E242–E248.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Karsenti D, Palazzo L, Perrot B, et al. 22G Acquire vs 20G Procore needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy of pancreatic masses: a randomized study comparing histologic sample quantity and diagnostic accuracy. Endoscopy. 2020;52:747–753.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Crino SF, Le Grazie M, Manfrin E, et al. Randomized trial comparing fork-tip and side-fenestrated needles for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions. Gastrointest Endosc. 2020;92:648–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hong R, Schubert WK. Menghini needle biopsy of the liver. Am J Dis Child. 1960;100:42–46.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hwang CY, Lee SS, Song TJ, et al. Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in diagnosis of pancreatic and peripancreatic lesions: a single center experience in Korea. Gut Liver. 2009;3:116–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Haba S, Yamao K, Bhatia V, et al. Diagnostic ability and factors affecting accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration for pancreatic solid lesions: Japanese large single center experience. J Gastroenterol. 2013;48:973–981.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Crino SF, Conti Bellocchi MC, Bernardoni L, et al. Diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA of small (</=15 mm) solid pancreatic lesions using a 25-gauge needle. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int. 2018;17:70–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The authors wish to acknowledge and thank the coordinators and all other investigators who contributed to this study.

Funding

This research has received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry, and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, 2-5-1 Shikata-cho, Kita-ku, Okayama, 700-8558, Japan

    Sho Mizukawa, Hironari Kato, Kazuyuki Matsumoto, Shinichiro Muro, Yutaka Akimoto, Daisuke Uchida, Takeshi Tomoda, Naoki Yamamoto, Shigeru Horiguchi, Koichiro Tsutsumi & Hiroyuki Okada

  2. Department of Diagnostic Pathology, Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry, and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Okayama University, Okayama, Japan

    Hirofumi Inoue & Noriyuki Tanaka

Authors
  1. Sho Mizukawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hironari Kato
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kazuyuki Matsumoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shinichiro Muro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yutaka Akimoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Daisuke Uchida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Takeshi Tomoda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Naoki Yamamoto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Shigeru Horiguchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Koichiro Tsutsumi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Hirofumi Inoue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Noriyuki Tanaka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Hiroyuki Okada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the protocol writing. SM, HK, and HO were involved in design. SM, YA, DU, TT, KM, NY, SH, and KT contributed to data collection. HI and NT were involved in pathological diagnosis.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hironari Kato.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

All authors have no conflicts of interest regarding this study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mizukawa, S., Kato, H., Matsumoto, K. et al. Effectiveness of Menghini-Type Needles for Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration of Pancreatic Masses. Dig Dis Sci 66, 3171–3178 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-020-06628-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-020-06628-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation