1. Agreement on endoscopic ultrasonography‐guided tissue specimens: Comparing a 20‐G fine‐needle biopsy to a 25‐G fine‐needle aspiration needle among academic and non‐academic pathologists
- Author
-
van Riet, Priscilla A, Cahen, Djuna L, Biermann, Katharina, Hansen, Bettina, Larghi, Alberto, Rindi, Guido, Fellegara, Giovanni, Arcidiacono, Paolo, Doglioni, Claudio, Decarli, Nicola Liberta, Iglesias‐Garcia, Julio, Abdulkader, Ihab, Iglesias, Hector Lazare, Kitano, Masayuki, Chikugo, Takaaki, Yasukawa, Satoru, van der Valk, Hans, Nguyen, Nam Quoc, Ruszkiewicz, Andrew, Giovannini, Marc, Poizat, Flora, van der Merwe, Schalk, Roskams, Tania, Santo, Erwin, Marmor, Silvia, Chang, Kenneth, Lin, Fritz, Farrell, James, Robert, Marie, Bucobo, Juan Carlos, Heimann, Alan, Baldaque‐Silva, Francisco, Moro, Carlos Fernández, Bruno, Marco J, Attili, Fabia, Aslanian, Harry, Adeniran, Adebowale, Lee, John G, Petrone, Mariachiara, Bories, Erwan, Scapa, Erez, Buscaglia, Jonathan M, and Wu, Maoxin
- Subjects
Digestive Diseases ,Cancer ,Clinical Research ,Bioengineering ,Clinical Trials and Supportive Activities ,Clinical Competence ,Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration ,Endosonography ,Humans ,Pancreas ,Pancreatic Neoplasms ,Pathologists ,ROC Curve ,Reproducibility of Results ,FNA ,FNB ,interobserver agreement ,pathology ,FNA ,FNB ,Clinical Sciences ,Oncology and Carcinogenesis ,Gastroenterology & Hepatology - Abstract
Background and aimA recently carried out randomized controlled trial showed the benefit of a novel 20-G fine-needle biopsy (FNB) over a 25-G fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needle. The current study evaluated the reproducibility of these findings among expert academic and non-academic pathologists.MethodsThis study was a side-study of the ASPRO (ASpiration versus PROcore) study. Five centers retrieved 74 (59%) consecutive FNB and 51 (41%) FNA samples from the ASPRO study according to randomization; 64 (51%) pancreatic and 61 (49%) lymph node specimens. Samples were re-reviewed by five expert academic and five non-academic pathologists and rated in terms of sample quality and diagnosis. Ratings were compared between needles, expert academic and non-academic pathologists, target lesions, and cytology versus histological specimens.ResultsBesides a higher diagnostic accuracy, FNB also provided for a better agreement on diagnosing malignancy (ĸ = 0.59 vs ĸ = 0.76, P
- Published
- 2019