Laparoscopically guided biopsy of non-macroscopically altered cecocolic lymph nodes in dog cadavers using...

Minimally invasive techniques allow tissue sampling while limiting procedural invasiveness. This study compared the quality of biopsy samples obtained through laparoscopically guided core needle (16 G or 18 G), laparoscopic pancreatic forceps or laparoscopic cup forceps with teeth for sampling non-grossly enlarged cecocolic lymph nodes in dog cadavers. Three techniques were performed in randomized order across 17 fresh cadavers, collecting three specimens per technique (153 total specimens, yielding 51 technique-level histological assessments). Sample collection time, observer-reported perceived difficulty, and a composite histological sample-adequacy score (0-14) were evaluated. Core needle biopsy required longer collection time than both forceps techniques (adjusted p = 0.002 for both comparisons). Perceived difficulty was lowest for pancreatic forceps, followed by cup forceps with teeth, and highest for core needle biopsy (all adjusted p ≤ 0.004). Both pancreatic forceps and cup forceps with teeth yielded higher composite adequacy scores than core needle biopsy (adjusted p = 0.019 and 0.006, respectively), whereas the two forceps did not differ (p = 0.504). Core needle biopsy was associated with greater fragmentation, lower structural preservation, and more histopathological changes limiting interpretation. Exploratory comparisons showed no differences between 16 G and 18 G needles. In this cadaveric model, both laparoscopic forceps techniques provided shorter collection times, lower perceived difficulty, and superior histological sample adequacy than laparoscopically guided core needle biopsy. Clinical safety and disease-specific diagnostic performance warrant further evaluation.