Role of macroscopic on-site evaluation of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration/biopsy: Results of a multicentric prospective study

Table 2 Baseline characteristics of patients who underwent macroscopic on-site evaluation after endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration or biopsy

Characteristics
Age (years), mean ± SD	59 ± 12
Sex, n (%)
Female	499 (49.5)
Male	509 (50.5)
Lesion location, n (%)
Pancreas	664 (62)
Stomach	101 (9.4)
Lymph nodes	96 (8.9)
Liver	46 (4.2)
Mediastinum	38 (3.5)
Other	129 (12)
Total	1074 (100)
The mean size of the target lesion on EUS (mm), mean ± SD	38 ± 17
Approach, n (%)
Transduodenal	585 (58)
Transgastric	350 (34.7)
Transesophageal	62 (6.2)
Transrectal	11 (1.1)
Type of the needle (FNA or FNB), n (%)
FNA	101 (10)
FNA-Expect-Boston	68 (6.7)
FNA-EchoTip-Cook	33 (3.3)
FNB	907 (90)
FNB-Acquire-Boston	751 (74.5)
FNB-Medtronic	20 (2)
FNB-ProCore-Cook	40 (4)
FNB-Trident-Microtech	96 (9.5)
Specimen acquisition method, n (%)
Suction method	381 (37.8)
Capillary method	290 (28.8)
Both	337 (33.4)
Number of needle passes (FNB), n (%)
1	154 (15.3)
2	680 (67.5)
3	149 (14.8)
4	25 (2.5)
Final diagnosis (conclusive or inconclusive), n (%)
Conclusive	963 (95.5)
Benign	102 (10.1)
Malignant	861 (85.4)
Inconclusive	45 (4.5)
Postprocedural adverse events, n (%)
No	975 (96.7)
Yes	33 (3.3)
Abdominal pain	17 (1.7)
Small blood collection	10 (1)
Transient fever	6 (0.6)

EUS: Endoscopic ultrasound; FNA: Fine-needle aspiration; FNB: Fine-needle biopsy.