Abdominal and pelvic needle aspiration biopsies: Can we perform them well when using small needles?

S. M. Stockberger, W. T. Ambrosius, M. G. Khamis, K. A. Bergan, C. L. Younger, Darrell Davidson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to compare abdominal fine-needle aspirations (FNAs) performed with large (≥20-gauge) or small (≤21-gauge) needles for diagnostic rate, number of samples required for diagnosis, diagnostic accuracy, and complication rates. Methods: Abdominal and pelvic FNA procedures were retrospectively reviewed. Needle size, imaging guidance used, number of pathology slides created, complications, and cytologic and final diagnoses were obtained by reviewing radiologic, medical, and cytology records. Results: Two hundred ninety procedures were included in the study. Two hundred fifty-seven were performed in patients having only one biopsy during the study interval. Of these, 159 had biopsies using small needles and 98 using large needles. Small needle biopsies had as high a diagnostic rate as did large needle biopsies (97.5% vs. 92.9%, p = 0.11). Small and large needle biopsies showed high diagnostic accuracy (96.1 and 98.9%, respectively; p = 0.27). Incorrect cytologic diagnoses plus nondiagnostic examinations composed 6.3% of biopsies using small needles and 8.2% of biopsies using larger needles (p = 0.62). Complication rates were low. Average number of needle passes tended to be lower when small needles were used. Conclusion: Small needles can be successfully used for abdominal and pelvic FNAs. Small needles require the same or fewer needle passes, have low risk, have the same or improved ability to obtain diagnostic material, and achieve correct diagnoses compared with larger needles.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)321-328
Number of pages8
JournalAbdominal Imaging
Volume24
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1999

Fingerprint

Needle Biopsy
Needles
Fine Needle Biopsy
Biopsy
Medical Records
Cell Biology
Pathology

Keywords

  • Abdomen
  • Biopsies
  • Pelvis

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Gastroenterology
  • Urology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiological and Ultrasound Technology

Cite this

Stockberger, S. M., Ambrosius, W. T., Khamis, M. G., Bergan, K. A., Younger, C. L., & Davidson, D. (1999). Abdominal and pelvic needle aspiration biopsies: Can we perform them well when using small needles? Abdominal Imaging, 24(4), 321-328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002619900508

Abdominal and pelvic needle aspiration biopsies : Can we perform them well when using small needles? / Stockberger, S. M.; Ambrosius, W. T.; Khamis, M. G.; Bergan, K. A.; Younger, C. L.; Davidson, Darrell.

In: Abdominal Imaging, Vol. 24, No. 4, 07.1999, p. 321-328.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Stockberger, SM, Ambrosius, WT, Khamis, MG, Bergan, KA, Younger, CL & Davidson, D 1999, 'Abdominal and pelvic needle aspiration biopsies: Can we perform them well when using small needles?', Abdominal Imaging, vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 321-328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002619900508
Stockberger SM, Ambrosius WT, Khamis MG, Bergan KA, Younger CL, Davidson D. Abdominal and pelvic needle aspiration biopsies: Can we perform them well when using small needles? Abdominal Imaging. 1999 Jul;24(4):321-328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002619900508
Stockberger, S. M. ; Ambrosius, W. T. ; Khamis, M. G. ; Bergan, K. A. ; Younger, C. L. ; Davidson, Darrell. / Abdominal and pelvic needle aspiration biopsies : Can we perform them well when using small needles?. In: Abdominal Imaging. 1999 ; Vol. 24, No. 4. pp. 321-328.
@article{13b9e456da654b89813d196c37c88169,
title = "Abdominal and pelvic needle aspiration biopsies: Can we perform them well when using small needles?",
abstract = "Background: The aim of this study was to compare abdominal fine-needle aspirations (FNAs) performed with large (≥20-gauge) or small (≤21-gauge) needles for diagnostic rate, number of samples required for diagnosis, diagnostic accuracy, and complication rates. Methods: Abdominal and pelvic FNA procedures were retrospectively reviewed. Needle size, imaging guidance used, number of pathology slides created, complications, and cytologic and final diagnoses were obtained by reviewing radiologic, medical, and cytology records. Results: Two hundred ninety procedures were included in the study. Two hundred fifty-seven were performed in patients having only one biopsy during the study interval. Of these, 159 had biopsies using small needles and 98 using large needles. Small needle biopsies had as high a diagnostic rate as did large needle biopsies (97.5{\%} vs. 92.9{\%}, p = 0.11). Small and large needle biopsies showed high diagnostic accuracy (96.1 and 98.9{\%}, respectively; p = 0.27). Incorrect cytologic diagnoses plus nondiagnostic examinations composed 6.3{\%} of biopsies using small needles and 8.2{\%} of biopsies using larger needles (p = 0.62). Complication rates were low. Average number of needle passes tended to be lower when small needles were used. Conclusion: Small needles can be successfully used for abdominal and pelvic FNAs. Small needles require the same or fewer needle passes, have low risk, have the same or improved ability to obtain diagnostic material, and achieve correct diagnoses compared with larger needles.",
keywords = "Abdomen, Biopsies, Pelvis",
author = "Stockberger, {S. M.} and Ambrosius, {W. T.} and Khamis, {M. G.} and Bergan, {K. A.} and Younger, {C. L.} and Darrell Davidson",
year = "1999",
month = "7",
doi = "10.1007/s002619900508",
language = "English",
volume = "24",
pages = "321--328",
journal = "Abdominal Imaging",
issn = "0942-8925",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Abdominal and pelvic needle aspiration biopsies

T2 - Can we perform them well when using small needles?

AU - Stockberger, S. M.

AU - Ambrosius, W. T.

AU - Khamis, M. G.

AU - Bergan, K. A.

AU - Younger, C. L.

AU - Davidson, Darrell

PY - 1999/7

Y1 - 1999/7

N2 - Background: The aim of this study was to compare abdominal fine-needle aspirations (FNAs) performed with large (≥20-gauge) or small (≤21-gauge) needles for diagnostic rate, number of samples required for diagnosis, diagnostic accuracy, and complication rates. Methods: Abdominal and pelvic FNA procedures were retrospectively reviewed. Needle size, imaging guidance used, number of pathology slides created, complications, and cytologic and final diagnoses were obtained by reviewing radiologic, medical, and cytology records. Results: Two hundred ninety procedures were included in the study. Two hundred fifty-seven were performed in patients having only one biopsy during the study interval. Of these, 159 had biopsies using small needles and 98 using large needles. Small needle biopsies had as high a diagnostic rate as did large needle biopsies (97.5% vs. 92.9%, p = 0.11). Small and large needle biopsies showed high diagnostic accuracy (96.1 and 98.9%, respectively; p = 0.27). Incorrect cytologic diagnoses plus nondiagnostic examinations composed 6.3% of biopsies using small needles and 8.2% of biopsies using larger needles (p = 0.62). Complication rates were low. Average number of needle passes tended to be lower when small needles were used. Conclusion: Small needles can be successfully used for abdominal and pelvic FNAs. Small needles require the same or fewer needle passes, have low risk, have the same or improved ability to obtain diagnostic material, and achieve correct diagnoses compared with larger needles.

AB - Background: The aim of this study was to compare abdominal fine-needle aspirations (FNAs) performed with large (≥20-gauge) or small (≤21-gauge) needles for diagnostic rate, number of samples required for diagnosis, diagnostic accuracy, and complication rates. Methods: Abdominal and pelvic FNA procedures were retrospectively reviewed. Needle size, imaging guidance used, number of pathology slides created, complications, and cytologic and final diagnoses were obtained by reviewing radiologic, medical, and cytology records. Results: Two hundred ninety procedures were included in the study. Two hundred fifty-seven were performed in patients having only one biopsy during the study interval. Of these, 159 had biopsies using small needles and 98 using large needles. Small needle biopsies had as high a diagnostic rate as did large needle biopsies (97.5% vs. 92.9%, p = 0.11). Small and large needle biopsies showed high diagnostic accuracy (96.1 and 98.9%, respectively; p = 0.27). Incorrect cytologic diagnoses plus nondiagnostic examinations composed 6.3% of biopsies using small needles and 8.2% of biopsies using larger needles (p = 0.62). Complication rates were low. Average number of needle passes tended to be lower when small needles were used. Conclusion: Small needles can be successfully used for abdominal and pelvic FNAs. Small needles require the same or fewer needle passes, have low risk, have the same or improved ability to obtain diagnostic material, and achieve correct diagnoses compared with larger needles.

KW - Abdomen

KW - Biopsies

KW - Pelvis

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0344731279&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0344731279&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s002619900508

DO - 10.1007/s002619900508

M3 - Article

C2 - 10390551

AN - SCOPUS:0344731279

VL - 24

SP - 321

EP - 328

JO - Abdominal Imaging

JF - Abdominal Imaging

SN - 0942-8925

IS - 4

ER -