Comparison of different biopsy forceps models for tissue sampling in eosinophilic esophagitis.
Détails
Télécharger: 2016_Sempoux_PMID27824401.pdf (623.58 [Ko])
Etat: Public
Version: Final published version
Licence: Non spécifiée
Etat: Public
Version: Final published version
Licence: Non spécifiée
ID Serval
serval:BIB_ECA199A68139
Type
Article: article d'un périodique ou d'un magazine.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Titre
Comparison of different biopsy forceps models for tissue sampling in eosinophilic esophagitis.
Périodique
Endoscopy
ISSN
1438-8812 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
0013-726X
Statut éditorial
Publié
Date de publication
12/2016
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
48
Numéro
12
Pages
1069-1075
Langue
anglais
Notes
Publication types: Comparative Study ; Journal Article
Publication Status: ppublish
Publication Status: ppublish
Résumé
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.
Mots-clé
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
Oui
Création de la notice
30/11/2016 20:51
Dernière modification de la notice
07/10/2019 14:50