Franseen needles gave more adequate samples and cores in EUS-guided tissue acquisition

Design

Systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of 30 studies

Population

Adults having EUS-guided tissue acquisition of solid gastrointestinal and pancreaticobiliary lesions (about 12,000 observations)

Primary outcome

Sample adequacy, histological core procurement, diagnostic accuracy, passes and adverse events

Effect

Adequacy OR 2.83 (95% CI 2.13 to 3.75); optimal cores OR 5.02 (3.29 to 7.68)

This meta-analysis pooled 30 studies of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition that compared Franseen needles, which have a three-pronged crown tip, with standard needles, or reported Franseen performance. Roughly 12,000 observations contributed.

Sample adequacy was higher with Franseen needles (OR 2.83, 95% CI 2.13 to 3.75; I² = 17%). Optimal histological cores were obtained in 89% of patients (95% CI 81 to 94%), with five-fold higher odds than standard needles (OR 5.02, 95% CI 3.29 to 7.68). Passes per patient fell by 0.36 on average. Pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.92 and 0.98, though the authors flag small-study effects for the accuracy estimates. Adverse events did not differ (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.58 to 2.19).

For pathology, better cores mean more material for histology and ancillary tests. The data are largely observational, so needle choice rests on adequacy rather than proven outcome benefit.

• Give feedback to endoscopists on core adequacy; needle design may influence it.
• Request cell block or core histology when ancillary testing will be needed.
• Record specimen adequacy consistently to allow audit.
• Treat the accuracy figures with caution because of small-study effects.

Why it matters

Specimen quality is a bottleneck for molecular testing, and needle design is one lever pathologists can raise with endoscopists.

Don't overread it

Evidence of small-study effects and mixed designs; it does not show better patient outcomes.

The statistics, in plain English

An odds ratio of 5.02 for optimal cores means the odds of getting a good core were about five times higher, not that cores were obtained five times as often. Small-study effects mean smaller studies reported larger benefits, which inflates pooled estimates.

Read the rest in the app

You have read your two free briefings this month. The app carries all 27 specialties, every morning, free — and this finding is waiting in it.

Get Daily Doctor — free

Scan to keep reading on your phone. No account needed to start.