Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.17555/jvc.2015.04.32.2.141

Effect of Endoscopic Forceps on the Quality of Duodenal Mucosal Biopsy in Healthy Cats  

Won, Jin-Hee (Research Institute of Natural Science, College of Veterinary Medicine, Gyeongsang National University)
Hong, Il-Hwa (Research Institute of Natural Science, College of Veterinary Medicine, Gyeongsang National University)
Jang, Hyo-Mi (Research Institute of Natural Science, College of Veterinary Medicine, Gyeongsang National University)
Eom, Na-Young (Research Institute of Natural Science, College of Veterinary Medicine, Gyeongsang National University)
Jee, Cho-Hee (Research Institute of Natural Science, College of Veterinary Medicine, Gyeongsang National University)
Jung, Hae-Won (Research Institute of Natural Science, College of Veterinary Medicine, Gyeongsang National University)
Kang, Byeong-Teck (Laboratory of Veterinary Dermatology and Neurology, College of Veterinary Medicine, Chungbuk National University)
Jeong, Dong Wook (Family Medicine Clinic and Research Institute of Convergence of Biomedical Science and Technology, Pusan National University Yangsan Hospital, Pusan National University School of Medicine)
Jung, Dong-In (Research Institute of Natural Science, College of Veterinary Medicine, Gyeongsang National University)
Publication Information
Journal of Veterinary Clinics / v.32, no.2, 2015 , pp. 141-147 More about this Journal
Abstract
Based on the results of previous studies, endoscopic biopsy sample's quality has a major impact on its adequacy for histopathology, and that the nature of the biopsy forceps can influence the specimen quality. The present study compared the effects of three different types of endoscopic biopsy forceps and two different operators on sample quality and adequacy for histopathology in three healthy cats. Every biopsy was performed between the major papilla and caudal duodenal flexure, and each operator performed five biopsies with each type of forceps on each cat, for a total of 90 biopsies. One pathologist evaluated the quality and adequacy of the obtained samples. Biopsies performed with large-cup forceps provided heavier and longer samples than the standard round forceps. With the same size forceps, the presence of alligator teeth had no effect on sample quality or adequacy for histopathological examination and assessment. Based on the results of the present study, although the standard round forceps could be used to obtain adequate samples for histopathology, large-cup forceps such as the standard oval and alligator jaw type have the advantage of obtaining high quality endoscopic samples.
Keywords
endoscopic biopsy; biopsy forceps; cat;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Abudayyeh S, Hoffman J, El-Zimaity HT, Graham DY. Prospective, randomized, pathologist-blinded study of disposable alligator-jaw biopsy forceps for gastric mucosal biopsy. Dig Liver Dis 2009; 41: 340-344.   DOI
2 Bernstein DE, Barkin JS, Reiner DK, Lubin J, Phillips RS, Grauer L. Standard biopsy forceps versus large-capacity forceps with and without needle. Gastrointest Endosc 1995; 41: 573-576.   DOI
3 Casamian-Sorrosal D, Willard MD, Murray JK, Hall EJ, Taylor SS, Day MJ. Comparison of histopathologic findings in biopsies from the duodenum and ileum of dogs with enteropathy. J Vet Intern Med 2010; 24: 80-83.   DOI
4 Chu KM YS, Wong WM. A prospective comparison of performance of biopsy forceps used in single passage with multiple bites during upper endoscopy. Endoscopy 2003: 338-342.
5 Elmunzer BJ, Higgins PD, Kwon YM, Golembeski C, Greenson JK, Korsnes SJ, Elta GH. Jumbo forceps are superior to standard large-capacity forceps in obtaining diagnostically adequate inflammatory bowel disease surveillance biopsy specimens. Gastrointest Endosc 2008; 68: 273-278.   DOI
6 Golden DL. Gastrointestinal endoscopic biopsy techniques. Semin Vet Med Surg (Small Anim) 1993; 8: 239-244.
7 Goutal-Landry CM, Mansell J, Ryan KA, Gaschen FP. Effect of endoscopic forceps on quality of duodenal mucosal biopsy in healthy dogs. J Vet Intern Med 2013; 27: 456-461.   DOI
8 Turk DJ, Kozarek RA, Botoman VA, Patterson DJ, Ball TJ. Disposable endoscopic biopsy forceps: comparison with standard forceps of sample size and adequacy of specimen. J Clin Gastroenterol 1991; 13: 76-78.   DOI
9 Willard MD, Lovering SL, Cohen ND, Weeks BR. Quality of tissue specimens obtained endoscopically from the duodenum of dogs and cats. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2001; 219: 474-479.   DOI
10 Willard MD, Mansell J, Fosgate GT, Gualtieri M, Olivero D, Lecoindre P, Twedt DC, Collett MG, Day MJ, Hall EJ, Jergens AE, Simpson JW, Else RW, Washabau RJ. Effect of sample quality on the sensitivity of endoscopic biopsy for detecting gastric and duodenal lesions in dogs and cats. J Vet Intern Med 2008; 22: 1084-1089.   DOI
11 Woods KL, Anand BS, Cole RA, Osato MS, Genta RM, Malaty H, Gurer IE, Rossi DD. Influence of endoscopic biopsy forceps characteristics on tissue specimens: results of a prospective randomized study. Gastrointest Endosc 1999; 49: 177-183.   DOI
12 Yang R, Vuitch F, Wright K, McCarthy J. Adequacy of disposable biopsy forceps for gastrointestinal endoscopy: a direct comparison with reusable forceps. Gastrointest Endosc 1990; 36: 379-381.   DOI
13 Neiger R, Robertson E, Stengel C. Gastrointestinal endoscopy in the cat: diagnostics and therapeutics. J Feline Med Surg 2013; 15: 993-1005.   DOI
14 Kozarek RA, Attia FM, Sumida SE, Raltz SL, Roach SK, Schembre DB, Brandabur JJ, Ball TJ, Gluck M, Jiranek GC, Patterson DJ, Bredfeldt JE, Gelfand M, McCormick SE, Drajpuch DB, Moran DK. Reusable biopsy forceps: a prospective evaluation of cleaning, function, adequacy of tissue specimen, and durability. Gastrointest Endosc 2001; 53: 747-750.   DOI
15 Mansell J, Willard MD. Biopsy of the gastrointestinal tract. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 2003; 33: 1099-1116.   DOI
16 Mee AS, Burke M, Vallon AG, Newman J, Cotton PB. Small bowel biopsy for malabsorption: comparison of the diagnostic adequacy of endoscopic forceps and capsule biopsy specimens. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1985; 291: 769-772.   DOI
17 Padda S, Shah I, Ramirez FC. Adequacy of mucosal sampling with the "two-bite" forceps technique: a prospective, randomized, blinded study. Gastrointest Endosc 2003; 57: 170-173.   DOI
18 Siegel M, Barkin JS, Rogers AI, Thomsen S, Clark R. Gastric biopsy: a comparison of biopsy forceps. Gastrointest Endosc 1983; 29: 35-36.   DOI
19 Spillmann T. Intestinal Endoscopy. In: Canine & Feline Gastroenterology, 1st ed. St. Louis: Elsevier. 2013:282.
20 Stengel C, Robertson E, Neiger R. Gastrointestinal endoscopy in the cat: equipment, techniques and normal findings. J Feline Med Surg 2013; 15: 977-991.   DOI
21 Tams TR, Webb CB. Endoscopic Examination of the Small Intestine. In: Small Animal Endoscopy, 3rd ed. St. Louis: Elsevier. 2011:173-180.
22 Washabau RJ, Day MJ, Willard MD, Hall EJ, Jergens AE, Mansell J, Minami T, Bilzer TW. Endoscopic, biopsy, and histopathologic guidelines for the evaluation of gastrointestinal inflammation in companion animals. J Vet Intern Med 2010; 24: 10-26.   DOI
23 Danesh BJ, Burke M, Newman J, Aylott A, Whitfield P, Cotton PB. Comparison of weight, depth, and diagnostic adequacy of specimens obtained with 16 different biopsy forceps designed for upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. Gut 1985; 26: 227-231.   DOI