Table 3 Procedure details and data related EUS-FNA
|
Overall n = 49 |
Upper GI n = 28 |
Lower GI n = 21 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Technical success rate of EUS-FNA, n (%) | 45 (91.8) | 25 (89.3) | 20 (95.2) |
| Reasons for unsuccessful cases, n |
Existence of vessels in the puncture route, 2 The lesion was not detected, 1 | Sigmoid colon perforation, 1 | |
| Type of needle, n (%) | |||
| 19-gauge FNA needle | 36 (73.5) | 21 (75.0) | 15 (71.4) |
| 22-gauge FNA needle | 2 (4.1) | 1 (3.6) | 1(4.8) |
| 25-gauge FNA needle | 1 (2.0) | 1 (3.6) | – |
| 19-gauge FNB needle | 1 (2.0) | – | 1 (4.8) |
| 22-gauge FNB needle | 5 (10.2) | 2 (7.1) | 3 (14.3) |
| Puncture site, n (%) |
Duodenum, 23 (82.1) Stomach, 2 (7.1) |
Rectum, 17 (81.0) Sigmoid colon, 3 (14.3) | |
| The number of passes, n, median (IQR) | 3 (2–3) | 3 (2–3) | 3 (2–3) |
| Adverse event, n (%) | 1 (4.8) | – | Perforation, 1 (4.8) |