EUS-CNB Versus EUS-SINK for Diagnosis of Upper Gastrointestinal (UGI) Subepithelial Tumors
NCT ID: NCT02282111
Last Updated: 2018-10-09
Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
TERMINATED
NA
56 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2014-07-31
2017-11-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
EUS-FNB vs. Single-incision Needle-knife (SINK) Biopsy for Gastrointestinal SELs
NCT02866045
EUS-Endodrill vs. EUS-FNA for Diagnosis of Submucosal Tumors in the Upper GI Tract
NCT02744651
22-G-Procore Needle for the Diagnosis of SETs of the Upper GI Tract
NCT01726010
EUS-FNA Versus KHB in Diagnostics of Upper Gastrointestinal Submucosal Tumors
NCT02025244
Feasibility and Yield of a New 20 G ProCore Needle With Coiled Sheath in the Gastrointestinal Subepithelial Tumors
NCT02884154
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Since standard endoscopy with pinch biopsies of the overlying mucosa often fails to provide an adequate sample for analysis, multiple other modalities to sample the lesion have been utilized: EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA), EUS-guided core needle biopsy (EUS-CNB), bite-on-bite forceps biopsies, EUS-guided single-incision with needle knife (SINK) and endoscopic resection.
EUS-FNA is now considered to be the usual method of sampling; however, the diagnostic yield is low: 38% to 82% . Moreover, EUS-FNA often provides insufficient specimens which may not allow for immunohistochemistry that is often essential for diagnosis . Thus EUS-CNB has been assessed for the purpose of obtaining a core sample which allows for histological assessment. Published data reveals a diagnostic (though not histologic) yield using EUS-CNB of 75% In 2011, the SINK technique for sampling was presented with a reported diagnostic accuracy of 92.8% \[8\]. The technique utilizes a conventional needle-knife connected to an electrosurgical unit. A 6 to 12-mm mucosal incision is made over the lesion. Then conventional biopsy forceps are introduced to obtain 3-5 samples. Subsequently, the incision is closed with 2 to 3 endoclips.
The purpose of this study is to prospectively compare the efficacy and safety of EUS-CNB with SINK in patients with upper GI SETs. The investigators hypothesis is that the SINK technique will be superior to the EUS-CNB in obtaining a histological specimen. The results of the study would provide data which may improve the diagnostic ability for SETs. This in turn will guide appropriate surveillance or management (surgical or endoscopic) for patients with these lesions.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
DIAGNOSTIC
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
EUS-CNB
Using a linear EUS with color and pulsed Doppler to scan the area for vessels, the lesion was then sampled with a 22-gauge beveled needle (using the slow capillary suction and fanning techniques with 5 to 15 to-and-fro movements with each pass). A total of 4 passes were performed and after that the procedure terminated.
22-gauge Procore needle (ProCore, Cook Medical Inc., Winston-Salem, NC)
Using a linear EUS with color and pulsed Doppler to scan the area for vessels, the lesion was then sampled with a 22-gauge beveled needle (using the slow capillary suction and fanning techniques with 5 to 15 to-and-fro movements with each pass). A total of 4 passes were performed and after that, the procedure terminated.
SINK
Using a conventional needle-knife sphincterotome connected to an electrosurgical unit, and under direct endoscopic vision, a 6-12mm linear incision was made from the periphery of the lesion to its highest convexity zone. A conventional biopsy forceps was then deeply introduced through the hole, and 2 bites were obtained per pass. A total of 4 passes were performed by passing the biopsy forceps through the incision on each occasion. The mucosal incision was then closed with endoclips whenever possible.
conventional needle-knife sphincterotome (Microknife XL; Boston Scientific Inc, Natick, Mass)
Using a conventional needle-knife sphincterotome connected to an electrosurgical unit, and under direct endoscopic vision, a 6-12mm linear incision was made from the periphery of the lesion to its highest convexity zone. A conventional biopsy forceps was then deeply introduced through the hole, and 2 bites were obtained per pass. A total of 4 passes were performed by passing the biopsy forceps through the incision on each occasion. The mucosal incision was then closed with endoclips whenever possible.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
22-gauge Procore needle (ProCore, Cook Medical Inc., Winston-Salem, NC)
Using a linear EUS with color and pulsed Doppler to scan the area for vessels, the lesion was then sampled with a 22-gauge beveled needle (using the slow capillary suction and fanning techniques with 5 to 15 to-and-fro movements with each pass). A total of 4 passes were performed and after that, the procedure terminated.
conventional needle-knife sphincterotome (Microknife XL; Boston Scientific Inc, Natick, Mass)
Using a conventional needle-knife sphincterotome connected to an electrosurgical unit, and under direct endoscopic vision, a 6-12mm linear incision was made from the periphery of the lesion to its highest convexity zone. A conventional biopsy forceps was then deeply introduced through the hole, and 2 bites were obtained per pass. A total of 4 passes were performed by passing the biopsy forceps through the incision on each occasion. The mucosal incision was then closed with endoclips whenever possible.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Location of SET: esophagus, stomach, duodenum
* Age \>18 years and older
* Patient consent obtained
Exclusion Criteria
* Upper GI SETs \<15 mm in size as measured during study EUS
* Lesions not necessitating tissue acquisition: i.e. lipomas, varices
* Cystic lesion
* Patients \< 18 years of age
* Uncorrectable Coagulopathy (INR \>1,5, platelets \<100,000)
* Patients with stigmata of portal hypertension
* Patients with post-surgical UGI anatomy (Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, esophagectomy etc)
* Uncooperative patients
* Pregnant women (women of childbearing age will undergo urine pregnancy testing, which is routine for all endoscopic procedures)
* Refusal to consent form
18 Years
100 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Johns Hopkins University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Mouen Khashab, MD
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
Johns Hopkins University
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Johns Hopkins Hospital
Baltimore, Maryland, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Provided Documents
Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.
Document Type: Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
IRB00028905
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.