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

Background and Aim Previous studies comparing endoscopic ultrasound‐guided fine‐needle aspiration ( EUS‐FNA ) results with different gauge needles have all been carried out with the stylet in place and show no clear advantage to the larger 22‐G needle. Similar data for stylet‐free EUS‐FNA ( SF‐EUS‐FNA ) are unavailable. The aim of the present study was to determine whether diagnostic yield and specimen adequacy is superior with the 22‐G needle as compared to the 25‐G needle. Methods All patients ≥18 years referred for solid‐lesion EUS‐FNA were eligible. Patients with suspected diagnosis of lymphoma, gastrointestinal stromal tumor, sarcoidosis, significant coagulopathy (international normalized ratio >1.5 or platelets <50 000/mm 3 ), use of clopidogrel within 7 days of EUS , and pregnancy were excluded. The two needles were compared regarding diagnostic yield, sample adequacy, bloodiness, ease of puncture, visibility, number of passes, failures, and complications. Results One hundred and twenty consecutive patients were included and 126 lesions were sampled. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value for the 22‐G SF‐EUS‐FNA were 83%, 100%, 100% and 56%, respectively, and for the 25‐G SF‐EUS‐FNA were 88.8%, 100%, 100% and 76.5%, respectively ( P  =  NS ). There were no significant differences between the 22‐G and the 25‐G FNA needles in sample adequacy, bloodiness, ease of puncture, FNA failure, visibility, number of passes and complications; and no significant differences between either needle were found in relation to lesion site. Conclusion For SF‐EUS‐FNA , the larger 22‐G needle offers no advantage over the smaller 25‐G needle.