Prospective Study
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2020.
World J Clin Cases. Jan 6, 2020; 8(1): 88-96
Published online Jan 6, 2020. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v8.i1.88
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)1/108/150.214
Number of needle passes [median (range)]4 (4-4)5 (4-9)< 0.001
Histopathological findings
Lymphoplasmacytic infiltrate without granulocytic infiltration9 (81.8)6 (26.1)0.003
Obliterative phlebitis2 (18.2)0 (0)0.098
Storiform fibrosis5 (45.5)1 (4.3)0.008
Abundant (> 10 cells/HPF) IgG4 positive cells7 (63.6)5 (21.7)0.026
Level 1 histopathological findings4 (36.4)1 (4.3)0.029
Level 1 or level 2 histopathological findings8 (72.7)3 (13.0)0.001
Adverse events0 (0)0 (0)

  • Citation: Sugimoto M, Takagi T, Suzuki R, Konno N, Asama H, Sato Y, Irie H, Watanabe K, Nakamura J, Kikuchi H, Takasumi M, Hashimoto M, Kato T, Hikichi T, Notohara K, Ohira H. 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. World J Clin Cases 2020; 8(1): 88-96
  • URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v8/i1/88.htm
  • DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v8.i1.88