We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparison of the slow-pull and aspiration methods of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration for next-generation sequencing-compatible tissue collection in non-small cell lung cancer.
Cancer Medicine 2023 September 22
BACKGROUND: Personalized treatment for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has advanced rapidly, and elucidating the genetic changes that trigger this disease is crucial for appropriate treatment selection. Both slow-pull and aspiration methods of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (EBUS-TBNA) are accepted methods for collecting samples suitable for next-generation sequencing (NGS) to examine driver gene mutations and translocations in NSCLC. Here, we aimed to determine which of these two methods is superior for obtaining higher-quality samples from patients with NSCLC.
METHODS: Seventy-one patients diagnosed with NSCLC via EBUS-TBNA using the slow-pull or aspiration (20-mL negative pressure) methods between July 2019 and September 2022 were included. A total of 203 tissue samples from the 71 patients were fixed in formalin, embedded in paraffin, and mounted on slides. The presence of tissue cores, degree of blood contamination, and number of tumor cells were compared between the groups. The success rate of NGS, using Oncomine Dx Target Test Multi-CDx, was also compared between the groups.
RESULTS: The slow-pull method was associated with a higher yield of tissue cores, lower degree of blood contamination, and higher number of tumor cells than the aspiration method. The success rate of the NGS was also significantly higher for the slow-pull group (95%) than for the aspiration group (68%).
CONCLUSION: Overall, these findings suggest that the slow-pull method is a superior technique for EBUS-TBNA to obtain high-quality tissue samples for NGS. The slow-pull method may contribute to the identification of driver gene mutations and translocations and facilitate personalized treatment of NSCLC.
METHODS: Seventy-one patients diagnosed with NSCLC via EBUS-TBNA using the slow-pull or aspiration (20-mL negative pressure) methods between July 2019 and September 2022 were included. A total of 203 tissue samples from the 71 patients were fixed in formalin, embedded in paraffin, and mounted on slides. The presence of tissue cores, degree of blood contamination, and number of tumor cells were compared between the groups. The success rate of NGS, using Oncomine Dx Target Test Multi-CDx, was also compared between the groups.
RESULTS: The slow-pull method was associated with a higher yield of tissue cores, lower degree of blood contamination, and higher number of tumor cells than the aspiration method. The success rate of the NGS was also significantly higher for the slow-pull group (95%) than for the aspiration group (68%).
CONCLUSION: Overall, these findings suggest that the slow-pull method is a superior technique for EBUS-TBNA to obtain high-quality tissue samples for NGS. The slow-pull method may contribute to the identification of driver gene mutations and translocations and facilitate personalized treatment of NSCLC.
Full text links
Trending Papers
Monitoring Macro- and Microcirculation in the Critically Ill: A Narrative Review.Avicenna Journal of Medicine 2023 July
ASA Consensus-based Guidance on Preoperative Management of Patients on Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists.Anesthesiology 2023 November 21
Common postbariatric surgery emergencies for the acute care surgeon: What you need to know.Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery 2023 December 2
Sodium bicarbonate Ringer's solution for hemorrhagic shock: A meta-analysis comparing crystalloid solutions.American Journal of Emergency Medicine 2023 November 6
Association between postinduction hypotension and postoperative mortality: a single-centre retrospective cohort study.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2023 November 22
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app