EUS-FNB for Solid Pancreatic Lesions: Side-fenestrated Vs Fork-tip Needle
NCT ID: NCT03622229
Last Updated: 2021-01-14
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
192 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2018-11-01
2020-08-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
In the present study we will compare the two types of needles in terms of histological yield for the evaluation of solid pancreatic lesions in the absence of rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE). Moreover diagnostic accuracy and the number of passes necessary to achieve the maximum diagnostic and histological yield, and safety will be investigated.
Objectives: To evaluate and compare the histologic retrieval rate of two different EUS-FNB needles of the same caliber (22 or 25 gauge). The passes will be 3 for each patient.
Study design: Randomized monocentric trial. Study population: Patients ≥18 years old, referred for EUS-guided tissue sampling of a solid pancreatic mass.
Intervention: EUS-guided tissue acquisition by mean EUS-FNB, using one of the following FNB needles: side-fenestrated 22 gauge, side-fenestrated 25 gauge, fork-tip 22 gauge or fork-tip 25 gauge.
Main study parameters/endpoints: The main endpoint is the histologic yield (defined as the percentage of a tissue core of at least 550 micron at the greatest axis), obtained at each of the 3 needle passes. Secondary endpoints include: i) safety; ii) concordance between macroscopic on-site evaluation (MOSE) and histopathological evaluation ; iii) Accuracy using 1, 2 or 3 passes.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
EUS-FNB With ROSE Vs. EUS-FNB Without ROSE
NCT03322592
RCT Comparing Accuracy Among Franseen, Forward-bevel Westcott, and Fork-tip EUS-FNB Needle in Diagnosis of Solid Pancreatic Lesions
NCT07032974
Prospective Comparison of Diagnostic Accuracy Between Contrast-enhanced Harmonic and Conventional EUS-guided Fine-needle Biopsy in Solid Pancreatic Lesions
NCT04924725
Prospective Study on the Role of Eus-fnb in the Diagnosis of Autoimmune Pancreatitis
NCT04397731
Contrast-Enhanced Harmonic vs Conventional EUS-guided Fine Needle Biopsy for Solid Pancreatic Lesions: Randomized Controlled Trial
NCT04924751
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The obtaining of bioptic tissue samples reduces the need for rapid on site-evaluation (ROSE) and allows an easier interpretation of the diagnosis even by non-expert pathologist. It also makes possible to perform ancillary investigations such as immunohistochemical, often useful for the differential diagnosis.
Two different EUS-FNB needles are available: the side-fenestrated reverse bevel and the fork-tip forward-acquiring". Both are available in 25, 22 and 19 gauge. The 22 gauge is the most commonly used since it combines the ease of use of small-sized caliber with the advantages of larger sized needles. The 25 gauge is universally recognized as the most manageable and flexible needle and is preferred when the lesion is small (\<20mm) or is in "difficult" conditions (lesion localized to the uncinate process or to distal tail, lesion distant from the transducer \> 15mm, need to cross \> 1cm of healthy pancreas, angled position of the instrument).
There are no prospective studies comparing the 22 and 25 gauge side-fenestrated and fork-tip needles. We therefore propose a prospective randomized study, to compare the two types of needles in terms of histologic and diagnostic yield, number of passes necessary to reach it in solid pancreatic lesions, in the absence of ROSE.
This is a randomized single center trial with two parallel arms in a (1:1) ratio. Consecutive patients with solid pancreatic masses and an indication to perform EUS-guided tissue acquisition will be evaluated and, if eligible, will be enrolled into the study. Randomization will take place after the lesion will have been visualized with EUS and the patient will be found suitable for inclusion.
The choice of needle gauge (22 or 25 gauge) will be at the discretion of the endosonographer in relation to the difficulty/risk of the procedure; therefore, two randomization lists will be drawn up, (one for the 22 gauge and one for the 25 gauge).
The choice of the needle gauge will be done before randomization so that the choice of the needle does not create bias in the results. The pathologist will be blinded to the needle caliber and type.
The sample size has been calculated for the primary outcome (histologic retrieval rate) using a group sequential design to define a proper interim analysis after at least 50% enrolment. The histologic yield of the two needle types can be summarized as follows:
22 gauge: 77% and 92% for the side-fenestrated and the fork-tip, respectively. 25 gauge: 60.5% and 85% for the side-fenestrated and the fork-tip, respectively.
With a type I error α of 5% and a power 1 - β of 80%, the total required sample size amounts to 330 patients (210 patients for 22G group and 120 patients for 25G group). Considering that 18% of patients must be added to counteract the estimated and lost drop-out rate at follow-up, overall 362 patients will be needed (196 patients for the 22G group and 112 patients for the 25G group).
Based on sample size calculation the two lists will consist in 24 blocks of 8 patients and 1 block of 4 patients for the 22G group and 14 blocks of 8 patients for the 25G group.
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
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
EUS-FNB with side-fenestrated needle
Before randomization, the endosonographer chooses the needle gauge to perform biopsy preferring the 25 gauge caliber for "difficult" lesions. The needle advances inside the lesion and the operator will perform some needle movements back and forth into the lesion while slowly withdrawn the stylet (slow-pull technique). If possible the direction of the needle inside the lesion will be changed during the movements (fanning technique) to sample different areas of the lesion. Three needle passes will be performed and the material acquired at each pass will be placed directly in formalin in a single vial.
Diagnostic Test: Histologic evaluation
Histologic evaluation
Samples collected by EUS-FNB without ROSE will be processed as histologic samples
EUS-FNB with fork-tip needle
Intervention: like above.
Diagnostic Test: Histologic evaluation.
Histologic evaluation
Samples collected by EUS-FNB without ROSE will be processed as histologic samples
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Histologic evaluation
Samples collected by EUS-FNB without ROSE will be processed as histologic samples
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Written informed consent.
Exclusion Criteria
* Cystic lesions even with solid component.
* Previous inclusion in present study.
* Previous histological or cytological diagnosis.
* Pancreatic lesion not seen at EUS.
* Technical impossibility to perform EUS-FNB (for example, for the interposition of vessels).
* Patients in an emergency situation.
* Pregnancy or feeding time.
18 Years
80 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata Verona
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Stefano Francesco Crinò, MD
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Stefano Francesco Crinò
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Azienda Ospedaliera Integrata Verona
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Stefano Francesco Crinò
Verona, , Italy
Azienda Ospedaliera Integrata Verona
Verona, , Italy
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Crino SF, Le Grazie M, Manfrin E, Conti Bellocchi MC, Bernardoni L, Granato A, Locatelli F, Parisi A, Di Stefano S, Frulloni L, Larghi A, Gabbrielli A. Randomized trial comparing fork-tip and side-fenestrated needles for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions. Gastrointest Endosc. 2020 Sep;92(3):648-658.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.05.016. Epub 2020 May 17.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
1823CESC
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.