CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Endosc Int Open 2018; 06(03): E356-E362
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-121880
Original article
Owner and Copyright © Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2018

Heparin priming of EUS-FNA needles does not adversely affect tissue cytology or immunohistochemical staining

David L. Diehl
Geisinger Medical Center, Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Division of Interventional Endoscopy, Danville, Pennsylvania, United States
,
Shaffer R. S. Mok
Geisinger Medical Center, Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Division of Interventional Endoscopy, Danville, Pennsylvania, United States
,
Harshit S. Khara
Geisinger Medical Center, Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Division of Interventional Endoscopy, Danville, Pennsylvania, United States
,
Amitpal S. Johal
Geisinger Medical Center, Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Division of Interventional Endoscopy, Danville, Pennsylvania, United States
,
H. Lester Kirchner
Geisinger Medical Center, Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Division of Interventional Endoscopy, Danville, Pennsylvania, United States
,
Fan Lin
Geisinger Medical Center, Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Division of Interventional Endoscopy, Danville, Pennsylvania, United States
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

submitted 16 June 2017

accepted after revision 31 August 2017

Publication Date:
07 March 2018 (online)

Abstract

Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) or biopsy (FNB) is an indispensable diagnostic tool. Improvements in needling technique have led to increasing tissue yields. Blood clogging of the needle can cause difficulties with specimen handling and stylet passage, which improves when the needle is primed with heparin before use. However, the effect of heparin on cytology, histology or immunochemistry (IHC) of FNA and FNB specimens is unknown. The goal of the study was to evaluate heparin priming on cytologic/histologic appearance, IHC staining, ease of stylet passage, and specimen bloodiness.

Patients and methods This was a retrospective study of patients undergoing EUS-FNA/FNB. Needle sizes were 25 gauge (g), 22 g, and 19 g. Heparin priming of the needle was done and the stylet replaced (“dry heparin”) or suction attached without replacing the stylet (“wet heparin”). Smears and cellblocks were examined by pathologists, and IHC staining were done as needed. Specimen bloodiness was compared with matched controls.

Results Adequate tissue yields were obtained in all samples (37 heparin, 36 no heparin). Heparin priming did not exhibit negative effects on cytologic or histologic interpretation of the specimens, nor IHC. There was no difference in cellblock bloodiness between the heparin primed needle specimens and the non-heparin control group. 

Conclusions Heparin priming of EUS-FNA or FNB needles does not negatively affect cytologic or histologic interpretation, nor interfere with IHC. In addition, heparin priming does not increase specimen bloodiness. When the “wet suction” technique is used for EUS-FNA, heparin priming can be used instead of saline priming of the EUS needle.

 
  • References

  • 1 Dumonceau JM, Polkowski M, Larghi A. et al. Indications, results, and clinical impact of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling in gastroenterology. European Society of Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 43: 897-909
  • 2 Sahai AV, Paquin SC, Gariépy G. A prospective comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration results obtained in the same lesion, with and without the needle stylet. Endoscopy 2010; 42: 900-903
  • 3 Rastogi A, Wani S, Gupta N. et al. A prospective, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial of EUS-guided FNA with and without a stylet. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 74: 58-64
  • 4 Puri R, Vilmann P, Săftoiu A. et al. Randomized controlled trial of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle sampling with or without suction for better cytological diagnosis. Scand J Gastroenterol 2009; 44: 499-504
  • 5 Bang JY, Magee SH, Ramesh J. et al. Randomized trial comparing fanning with standard technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic mass lesions. Endoscopy 2013; 45: 445-450
  • 6 Nakai Y, Isayama H, Chang KJ. et al. Slow pull versus suction in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid masses. Dig Dis Sci 2014; 59: 1578-1585
  • 7 Attam R, Arain MA, Bloechl SJ. et al. “Wet suction technique (WEST)”: a novel way to enhance the quality of EUS-FNA aspirate. Results of a prospective, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial using a 22-gauge needle for EUS-FNA of solid lesions. Gastrointest Endosc 2015; 81: 1401-1407
  • 8 Varadarajulu S, Hasan MK, Bang JY. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition. Dig Endosc 2014; 26: 62-69
  • 9 Kasugai H, Yamamoto R, Tatsuta M. et al. Value of heparinized fine-needle aspiration biopsy in liver malignancy. Am J Roentgenol 1985; 144: 243-244
  • 10 Hasan MK, Bang JY, Varadarajulu S. Diagnostic value of priming the endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration needle with heparin to improve specimen quality. Digestive Endosc 2014; 26: 491
  • 11 Puri R, Thandassery RB, Choudhary NS. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of the adrenal glands: analysis of 21 patients. Clin Endosc 2015; 48: 165-170
  • 12 Hawes RH, Fockens P, Varadarajulu S. Endosonography, 3rd Ed. St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Saunders; 2014