Is there a difference in diagnostic yield between 22g and 25g needles in endoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of solid lesions?

Randomized controlled trial comparing stylet‐free endoscopic ultrasound‐guided fine‐needle aspiration with 22‐G and 25‐G needles

“…Another small prospective study reported greater accuracy of the 25‐G needle only in uncinate lesions . However, the rest of the studies failed to show any benefit of one needle over the other . Furthermore, two meta‐analyses have been recently published with conflicting conclusions .…”

A prospective multicenter evaluation of a new side‐port endoscopic ultrasound‐fine‐needle aspiration in solid upper gastrointestinal lesions

“…The diagnostic yield in prospective studies with a variety of needles rarely exceeds 90% even in expert centers. In fact, multiple passes at EUS‐FNA are often required to obtain sufficient material for diagnosis 14,15 . This prolongs the procedure and exposes the patient to an increased risk of biopsy related complications 16,17 .…”

“…In fact, multiple passes at EUS-FNA are often required to obtain sufficient material for diagnosis. 14,15 This prolongs the procedure and exposes the patient to an increased risk of biopsy related complications. 16,17 Erickson et al showed that to achieve a maximum diagnostic yield in solid pancreatic lesion up to five passes were required, but this may be reduced depending on the processing methods employed, equipment used and site targeted.…”

Fine needle aspiration at endoscopic ultrasound with a novel side-port needle: a pilot experience

“…Multiple passes at EUS FNA are often required to obtain sufficient material for diagnosis; five or six passes for solid pancreatic lesions and four passes for lymph nodes [Conway et al 2009;Erickson et al 2000;Yamao et al 2009]. This prolongs the procedure and exposes the patient to an increased risk of biopsy related complications [Sakamoto et al 2009;Wiersema et al 1997].…”