Copyright
©The Author(s) 2016.
World J Gastroenterol. Oct 21, 2016; 22(39): 8790-8797
Published online Oct 21, 2016. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i39.8790
Published online Oct 21, 2016. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i39.8790
Table 3 Cytological diagnostic capacity and specimen quality of the different suction techniques
Slow-pull (n = 31) | 5-mL (n = 19) | 10-mL (n = 34) | 20-mL (n = 18) | P value1 | |
Cytological diagnostic capacity | |||||
Accuracy | 28/31 (90.3%) | 12/19 (63.2%) | 20/34 (58.8%) | 10/18 (55.6%) | 0.0192 |
Sensitivity | 15/17 (88.2%) | 5/12 (41.7%) | 8/20 (40.0%) | 4/11 (36.4%) | 0.0092 |
Specificity | 13/14 (92.9%) | 7/7 (100%) | 12/14 (85.7%) | 6/7 (85.7%) | 0.914 |
PPV | 15/16 (93.8%) | 5/5 (100%) | 8/10 (80.0%) | 4/5 (80.0%) | 0.542 |
NPV | 13/15 (86.7%) | 7/14 (50.0%) | 12/24 (50.0%) | 6/13 (46.2%) | 0.079 |
Cytological specimen quality | |||||
Cellularity score ≥ 2 | 22/31 (71.0%) | 11/19 (57.9%) | 20/34 (58.8%) | 13/18 (72.2%) | 0.598 |
Blood contamination score ≥ 2 | 9/31 (29.0%) | 10/19 (52.6%) | 24/34 (70.6%) | 13/18 (72.2%) | 0.0032 |
- Citation: Chen JY, Ding QY, Lv Y, Guo W, Zhi FC, Liu SD, Cheng TM. Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles. World J Gastroenterol 2016; 22(39): 8790-8797
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v22/i39/8790.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v22.i39.8790