Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration vs fine needle biopsy for pancreatic masses, subepithelial lesions, and lymph nodes

Table 3 Prospective comparative trials of endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration vs fine needle biopsy for lymph node biopsy

Ref.	Study design	Number of subjects	Needle size (FNA, FNB)	Lymph nodes sampled	Diagnostic yield/specimen adequacy (EUS-FNA vs EUS-FNB)	Diagnostic accuracy (EUS-FNA vs EUS-FNB)	Number of needle passes needed (EUS-FNA vs EUS-FNB)	Comments
Nagula et al[49], 2018)	RCT	46	Variable, variable Procore	All lymph nodes	92.9% vs 94.4% (NS)	N/A	2 vs 2 (NS)
de Moura et al[52], 2020)	Retrospective study of prospectively collected data	209	Variable, variable	All lymph nodes	N/A	78.8% vs 83.2% (NS)	N/A	For peri-hepatic lesions, EUS-FNB was significantly more accurate

EUS-FNA: Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration; EUS-FNB: Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle biopsy; RCT: Randomized controlled trial; N/A: Not applicable; NS: Not significant.