COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

A Randomized Trial Evaluating the Effect of 10 versus 20 Revolutions Inside the Lymph Node on the Diagnostic Yield of EBUS-TBNA in Subjects with Sarcoidosis.

BACKGROUND: Endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS)-guided transbronchial needle aspiration (TBNA) is the preferred modality for sampling intrathoracic lymph nodes in patients with suspected sarcoidosis. Whether the number of revolutions of the needle inside the lymph node while performing TBNA affects the diagnostic yield is unknown.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this paper was to compare the yield of different numbers of needle revolutions (10 vs. 20) during EBUS-TBNA in sarcoidosis.

METHODS: Consecutive subjects with a clinicoradiological suspicion of sarcoidosis were randomized 1: 1 to undergo EBUS-TBNA with either 10 (group 1) or 20 revolutions (group 2). The primary and secondary outcomes were the diagnostic yield and adequacy of aspirates, respectively. Other outcomes were procedure duration, gross blood contamination of the aspirates, and safety of the procedure.

RESULTS: Of the 171 subjects screened, 150 (mean age 43.5 years; 47.3% women) were randomized. A mean of 2.8 (group 1: 2.8, group 2: 2.7; p = 0.37) lymph nodes were sampled per subject with a mean of 2.1 passes per node in each group (p = 0.60). Among 133 subjects finally diagnosed with sarcoidosis, there was no difference (p = 0.65) in the diagnostic yield of EBUS-TBNA between group 1 (52/65, 80.0%) and group 2 (57/68, 83.8%). Adequate aspirates were obtained in 96.9 and 97.1% of the subjects in groups 1 and 2, respectively (p = 1.00). There was no difference in the procedure duration, the proportion of subjects with grossly bloody specimens, or complications between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic yield and specimen adequacy were not different when EBUS-TBNA was performed with 10 or 20 revolutions in subjects with sarcoidosis.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

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