Comparison of clinical efficacy, subjective user experience, and safety for two different core biopsy needles, the Achieve® and Marquee®.

Journal Article (Journal Article)

Purpose

To compare clinical efficacy, subjective radiologist preference, and complication rates for two different core biopsy needles, the Achieve® and Marquee®.

Methods

Retrospective review included consecutive patients who underwent 18 gauge non-targeted core liver biopsy, 30 with Achieve® (Merit Medical) and 30 with Marquee® (BD Bard) Pathologist (blinded to needle type) reviewed specimen total length, maximum width, and portal triad count. Sixteen radiologists subjectively rated (1 to 5(best)) each needle for cocking, firing, recoil, chamber exposure, handling, and overall. A medical records search of all (targeted and non-targeted) core liver biopsies 1/1/17-9/30/2020 compared rates of major (requiring transfusion and/or embolization) and minor (self-limited bleeding) hemorrhagic complications. Comparison between needle types was performed using t-test.

Results

For Achieve® and Marquee® needles, the respective mean (SD) for total length(mm) was 29.7(7.0) and 31.9(4.6), p = 0.1; max width(mm) was 0.78(0.1) and 0.85(0.1), p < 0.01; and number of portal triads was 15.3(5.3) and 17.3(5.3), p = 0.2. Radiologists subjectively preferred the Marquee® for several measures including cocking, chamber exposure, and overall (p < 0.02 for each), while the needles were rated similarly for firing, recoil, and handling. Review of 800 cases showed no difference in major (1.0% Achieve®, 1.9% Marquee®, p = 0.5) or minor (1.5% Achieve®, 0.5% Marquee®, p = 0.3) rates of hemorrhagic complications.

Conclusion

Liver biopsy specimens were significantly wider with Marquee® compared to Achieve®. Radiologists preferred the Marquee® for multiple tactile measures, while the major complication rate was not significantly different. While both needles have a similar side-notch design, the Marquee® needle demonstrates better sample quality and higher user preference, without compromising safety.

Full Text

Duke Authors

Cited Authors

  • Ho, LM; Pendse, AA; Ronald, J; Desai, H; Dai, R; Ziegler, C; Nelson, RC; Wildman-Tobriner, B

Published Date

  • June 28, 2021

Published In

PubMed ID

  • 34181039

Electronic International Standard Serial Number (EISSN)

  • 2366-0058

International Standard Serial Number (ISSN)

  • 2366-004X

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.1007/s00261-021-03187-5

Language

  • eng