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
Figure 1 Cytological assessments of the samples obtained by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration using four suction techniques (HE, orig.
mag. × 40). A: The suction technique with a 20-mL syringe received a score of 2 for cellularity and a score of 3 for blood contamination; B: The suction technique with a 10-mL syringe received a score of 2 for cellularity and a score of 3 for blood contamination; C: The suction technique with a 5-mL syringe received a score of 3 for cellularity and a score of 2 for blood contamination; D: The slow-pull technique received a score of 3 for cellularity and a score of 1 for blood contamination.
- 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