Evaluation of 19-gauge endoscopic ultrasonography aspiration needles using various echoendoscopes

 

 Permissions and Reprints

Background and study aims: 19-gauge (19G) needles are used for EUS-guided tissue acquisition and interventions. The aim of the current study was to compare the functional characteristics of 19G EUS needles by means of using various echoendoscopes in a bench simulator.

Methods: The angles achieved for 19G needles (EchoTip: ET-19G, EchoTip Flex: ExF-19G, Expect: Ex-19G, and ProCore: PC-19G) and for the distal tip of the echoendoscope were evaluated for maximal angulation settings of the distal tip and the elevator. Also the resistance to advancement of the 19G needles at these endoscope settings was assessed. All evaluations were done with endoscopes in a straight and in a curved position.

Results: There was no large discrepancy for scope and needle angles among all echoendoscopes except for the slim Pentax scope (EG-3270UK). The ExF-19G and PC-19G needles showed better optimal angles in various conditions compared to standard 19G needles. In straight scope position, out of the 20 conditions (5 endoscopes × 2 positions of the distal tip × 2 elevator positions) the numbers of optimal angulations achieved for the Ex-19G, ExF-19G, ET-19G, and PC-19G, were 11 /20 (55 %), 20 /20 (100 %), 14 /20 (70 %) and 18 /20 (90 %), respectively. However, regarding resistance, it was impossible to advance theneedle with 14 /20 settings (70 %) for the Ex-19G, 3 /20 (15 %) for the ExF-19G, 10 /20 (50 %) for the ET-19G and 7 /20 (35 %) for the PC-19G. When the scopes were bent, with regard to the force needed to advance the needle, the numbers of optimal settings, for the Ex-19G, ExF-19G, ET-19G, and PC-19G, were 1 (5 %), 13 (65 %), 6 (30 %) and 8 (40 %), respectively. The mean maximum resistance to advancement was less for the ExF-19G than for the other needless in almost all scope and angle conditions (p < 0.05).

Conclusion: Although there was no difference between needles, the resistance to passage was least with the flexible 19-gauge needle (ExF-19G).

• References

• 1 Iwashita T, Yasuda I, Doi S et al. Use of samples from endoscopic ultrasound-guided 19-gauge fine-needle aspiration in diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012; 10: 316-322
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Varadarajulu S, Bang JY, Hebert-Magee S. Assessment of the technical performance of the flexible 19-gauge EUS-FNA needle. Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 76: 336-343
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 3 Varadarajulu S, Lopes TL, Wilcox CM et al. EUS versus surgical cyst-gastrostomy for management of pancreatic pseudocysts. Gastrointest Endosc 2008; 68: 649-655
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Itoi T, Binmoeller KF, Shah J et al. Clinical evaluation of a novel lumen-apposing metal stent for endosonography-guided pancreatic pseudocyst and gallbladder drainage (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2012; 75: 870-876
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Park DH, Lee SS, Moon SH et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided versus conventional transmural drainage for pancreatic pseudocysts: a prospective randomized trial. Endoscopy 2009; 41: 842-848
  Google Scholar
• 6 Seewald S, Ang TL, Richter H et al. Long-term results after endoscopic drainage and necrosectomy of symptomatic pancreatic fluid collections. Dig Endosc 2012; 24: 36-41
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Giovannini M, Dotti M, Bories E et al. Hepaticogastrostomy by echo-endoscopy as a palliative treatment in a patient with metastatic biliary obstruction. Endoscopy 2003; 35: 1076-1078
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Horaguchi J, Fujita N, Noda Y et al. Endosonography-guided biliary drainage in cases with difficult transpapillary endoscopic biliary drainage. Dig Endosc 2009; 21: 239-244
  Google Scholar
• 9 Itoi T, Isayama H, Sofuni A et al. Stent selection and tips on placement technique of EUS-guided biliary drainage: transduodenal and transgastric stenting. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 2011; 18: 664-672
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Artifon EL, Pinhata OtochJ et al. Endoscopy Ultra- Sonography -guided biliary drainage in the surgical -endoscopy era. Rev Gastroenterol Peru 2001; 31: 365-375
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Park DH, Koo JE, Oh J et al. EUS-guided biliary drainage with one-step placement of a fully covered metal stent for malignant biliary obstruction: A prospective feasibility study. Am J Gastroenterol 2009; 104: 2168-2174
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Hara K, Yamao K, Niwa Y et al. Prospective clinical study of EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy for malignant lower biliary tract obstruction. Am J Gastroenterol 2011; 106: 1239-1245
  Google Scholar
• 13 Kahaleh M. Therapeutic and advanced endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am. 2012 Jul 22: xv
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Baron TH, Topazian MD. Endoscopic transduodenal drainage of the gallbladder: implications for endoluminal treatment of gallbladder disease. Gastrointest Endosc 2007; 65: 735-737
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Eum J, Park doHyun, Ryu CH et al. EUS-guided biliary drainage with a fully covered metal stent as a novel route for natural orifice transluminal endoscopic biliary interventions: a pilot study (with videos). Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 72: 1279-1284
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 16 Itoi T, Itokawa F, Kurihara T. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided gallbladder drainage: actual technical presentations and review of the literature (with videos). J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 2011; 18: 282-286
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 17 Giovannini M. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided pancreatic drainage. Gastrointest Endosc Clin N Am 2012; 22: 221-230
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Itoi T, Kikuyama M, Ishii K et al. EUS-guided rendezvous with single-balloon enteroscopy for treatment of stenotic pancreaticojejunal anastomosis in post-Whipple patients (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 398-401
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Itoi T, Itokawa F, Kurihara T et al. Experimental endoscopy: objective evaluation of EUS needles. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 509-516
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Varadarajulu S, Fraig M, Schmulewitz N et al. Comparison of EUS-guided 19-gauge trucut needle biopsy with EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration. Endoscopy 2004; 36: 397-401
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Itoi T, Itokawa H, Sofuni A et al. Puncture of solid pancreatic tumors guided by endoscopic ultrasonography: A pilot study series comparing trucut and 19-gauge and 22-gauge aspiration needle. Endoscopy 2005; 37: 362-366
  Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Song TJ, Kin J, Lee SS et al. The prospective tandomized, controlled trial of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration using 22G and 19G aspiration needles for solid pancreatic or peripancreatic masses. Am J Gastroenterol 2010; 105: 1739-1745
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 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
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar