EUS-guided versus percutaneous spleen biopsy: Comparative safety and diagnostic performance in a tertiary center
Junghwan Lee, Tae Jun Song, Yoonchan Lee, Sung Hyun Cho, Gunn Huh, Dongwook Oh, Dong-Wan SeoBackground and Objectives:
Percutaneous biopsy is the traditional method for diagnosing splenic lesions but carries a risk of hemorrhage due to the organ’s rich vascularity. EUS-guided biopsy has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative that may reduce bleeding risk. This study compared the safety and diagnostic performance of EUS-guided and percutaneous spleen biopsies.
Methods:
We retrospectively analyzed 91 patients who underwent splenic biopsy at a tertiary center between 2015 and 2023 (EUS,
Results:
Clinically relevant adverse events (AGREE grade ≥2) occurred among 0% of EUS-guided and 10.7% of percutaneous biopsies (absolute risk difference: −10.7%, 95% confidence interval: −21.1% to −0.3%;
Conclusion:
EUS-guided spleen biopsy was associated with a lower rate of clinically relevant adverse events, maintaining comparable diagnostic accuracy. These findings suggest that EUS-guided biopsy is a safer and equally effective alternative for splenic tissue acquisition, warranting validation in larger prospective studies.