Comparison of different biopsy forceps models for tissue sampling in eosinophilic esophagitis.

Details

Ressource 1Download: 2016_Sempoux_PMID27824401.pdf (623.58 [Ko])
State: Public
Version: Final published version
License: Not specified
Serval ID
serval:BIB_ECA199A68139
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Comparison of different biopsy forceps models for tissue sampling in eosinophilic esophagitis.
Journal
Endoscopy
Author(s)
Bussmann C., Schoepfer A.M., Safroneeva E., Haas N., Godat S., Sempoux C., Simon H.U., Straumann A.
ISSN
1438-8812 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
0013-726X
Publication state
Published
Issued date
12/2016
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
48
Number
12
Pages
1069-1075
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Comparative Study ; Journal Article
Publication Status: ppublish
Abstract
Background and aims: Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a mixed inflammatory and fibrostenotic disease. Unlike superficial inflammatory changes, subepithelial fibrosis is not routinely sampled in esophageal biopsies. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of deep esophageal sampling with four different types of biopsy forceps. Patients and methods: In this cross-sectional study, esophageal biopsies were taken in 30 adult patients by one expert endoscopist. Biopsies sampled from distal esophagus using a static jaw forceps (Olympus, FB-11K-1) were compared with proximal biopsies sampled with static jaw (Olympus, FB-45Q-1), alligator jaw (Olympus, FB-210K), and large-capacity forceps (Boston Scientific, Radial Jaw 4). One pathologist calculated the surface area of epithelial and subepithelial layers in hematoxylin and eosin (H&E)-stained biopsies. Results: Subepithelial tissue was acquired in 97 % (static jaw FB-11K-1), 93 % (static jaw FB-45Q-1), 80 % (alligator jaw), and 55 % (large-capacity) of samples. Median (interquartile [IQR]) ratios of surface area of epithelial to subepithelial tissue were: static jaw FB-45Q-1, 1.07 (0.65 - 4.465); static jaw FB-11K-1, 1.184 (0.608 - 2.545); alligator jaw, 2.353 (1.312 - 4.465); and large-capacity, 2.71 (1.611 - 4.858). The static jaw models obtained a larger surface area of subepithelial tissue compared with the alligator jaw (P < 0.001 and P = 0.037, for FB-11K-1 and FB-45Q-1, respectively) and the large-capacity forceps (P < 0.001, for both static jaw models). No esophageal perforations occurred. Conclusions: The static jaw forceps models allowed sampling of subepithelial tissue in > 90 % of biopsies and appear to be superior to alligator or large-capacity forceps in sampling larger amounts of subepithelial tissue.

Keywords
Adult, Biopsy/adverse effects, Biopsy/instrumentation, Cross-Sectional Studies, Eosinophilic Esophagitis/pathology, Esophagus/pathology, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surgical Instruments/adverse effects
Pubmed
Web of science
Open Access
Yes
Create date
30/11/2016 21:51
Last modification date
07/10/2019 15:50
Usage data