Can the wet suction technique change the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for diagnosing autoimmune pancreatitis type 1? A prospective single-arm study

Table 1 Comparisons of patient characteristics between the wet suction technique group and the DRY group

	WEST group (n = 11)	DRY group (n = 23)	P value
Age (yr, means ± SD)	62.9 ± 12.4	61.0 ± 9.6	0.626
Sex, male/female	6/5	21/2	0.024
Pancreatic swelling type, diffuse/focal	6/5	11/12	1.0
Serum IgG4 level [mg/dL, median (range)]	568 (177-2100)	447 (149-1480)	0.663

WEST: Wet suction technique.

Table 2 Comparisons of the procedures and results between wet suction technique and DRY techniques for endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration, n (%)

	WEST group (n = 11)	DRY group (n = 23)	P value
EUS-FNA needle (19 G/22 G)	1/10	8/15	0.214
Number of needle passes [median (range)]	4 (4-4)	5 (4-9)	< 0.001
Histopathological findings
Lymphoplasmacytic infiltrate without granulocytic infiltration	9 (81.8)	6 (26.1)	0.003
Obliterative phlebitis	2 (18.2)	0 (0)	0.098
Storiform fibrosis	5 (45.5)	1 (4.3)	0.008
Abundant (> 10 cells/HPF) IgG4 positive cells	7 (63.6)	5 (21.7)	0.026
Level 1 histopathological findings	4 (36.4)	1 (4.3)	0.029
Level 1 or level 2 histopathological findings	8 (72.7)	3 (13.0)	0.001
Adverse events	0 (0)	0 (0)

WEST: Wet suction technique; EUS-FNA: Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration.