Objective: Endobronchial ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EBUS-FNA) cytology and EBUS-miniforceps biopsy (MFB) have emerged as less invasive tools for evaluating mediastinal lymph nodes and pulmonary lesions. The aim of this study is to compare the diagnostic yields of EBUS-FNA cytology to EBUS-MFB. Study Design: A retrospective cohort study was performed by reviewing the database at our institution between December 12, 2010, and August 10, 2012. A total of 476 consecutive cases were identified. Of these, 227 patients had concurrent FNA and MFB taken during the procedure. The results and diagnostic yields of both techniques are calculated. Results: Of the 476 cases, the mean age was 62 ± 14 years with 53% being males. In 453 of the total cases, the less invasive FNA technique alone produced enough diagnostic cytology material negating the need for concurrent MFB. Of these FNA cases, 280 were diagnosed as malignant neoplasms. The diagnostic yield of EBUS-FNA cytology was comparable to EBUS-MFB (95% FNA and 94% MFB). There were discordant diagnoses between cytology and histology in 19 of the 227 (∼8.4%) cases. Conclusions: EBUS-FNA cytology is a more efficacious diagnostic modality compared to EBUS-MFB.

Keywords:
Cytology, Endobronchial ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration, Miniforceps biopsy, Lung
© 2014 S. Karger AG, Basel
2014
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.