Different Suction Techniques For Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Biopsy In Pancreatic Solid Lesions
NCT ID: NCT03849209
Last Updated: 2019-02-26
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
110 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2017-05-01
2018-05-31
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.
The Comparison of Wet Suction and Dry Suction Technique in EUS-FNA for the Outcomes in Pancreatic Solid Lesions
NCT03821974
Impact of Suction in the EUS-guided Fine Needle Biopsy of Solid Pancreatic Lesions
NCT04164017
Comparision of EUS-FNB Techniques for Diagnose of Solid Pancreatic Lesions
NCT05549856
Conventional Versus Elastography Targeted Endoscopic Ultrasound Fine Needle Aspiration of Solid Pancreatic Lesions
NCT03210948
EUS-FNB for Solid Pancreatic Lesions: Side-fenestrated Vs Fork-tip Needle
NCT03622229
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Randomization was performed using random sequences generated by a computer and then closed in consecutive numbered envelopes.
The degree of blood contamination of the specimen was based on the pathologist evaluation of the formalin fixed and paraffin embedded tissue samples and defined as significant when a large amount of blood cells made pathological diagnosis difficult to be made. On the other hand, blood contamination of the specimen was defined as not significant when no or only few blood cells were present without any influence on the pathological diagnosis.
Sensitivity was defined as the true positive rate whereby the test was the final cytologic diagnosis, Specificity as the true negative rate (proportion of actual negatives that are correctly identified as such), positive predictive value was defined as the number of true positive divided the number of positive calls (true positive and false positive), negative predictive value was defined as the number of true negative divided the number of negative calls (true negative and false negative). Diagnostic accuracy was defined as the ratio between the sum of true positive and true negative values divided by the total number of masses.
Technical success was defined as the capability of sampling the target lesion associated with the presence of a visible core, according to endosonographer's judgment, potentially useful for the final pathological analysis.
Adverse events were defined based on the criteria expressed by Cotton et al. \[Cotton PB. Gastrointest Endosc 2010;71:446-54\] Samples positive for malignancy were considered diagnostic for malignancy, while in patients with negative Ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy, surgical specimen evaluation, results of other diagnostic investigations and/or a clinical follow-up of at least 6 months were used to establish the definitive diagnosis.
Statistical Analysis The sample size was calculated based on the results of a previous study \[Nakai Y H. Dig Dis Sci. 2014;59:1578-85\] that showed that blood contamination of the specimen was lower with the stylet slow-pull technique as compared with the standard suction technique (25% vs 70%), with a consequent increase in the diagnostic accuracy. Based on these data we calculated for a difference of 25%, at a power of 80% and an alpha of 0.05 (two-sided test), a final sample size of 110 patients (55 patients in each group). Continuous variables will be reported as mean +/- standard deviation (SD) or as median with interquartile range. Categorical variables will be presented as numbers and percentage and will be compared either using the chi-square test (with Yates' correction when appropriate) or Fisher exact test.
Statistical was conducted using the Fisher's exact test for categorical variables and the Mann-Whitney U-test for continuous variables. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and overall diagnostic accuracy for each arm were investigated by comparing the results with the definitive diagnosis. Statistical tests were considered significant at a corresponding p value of \<0.05. Data handling and analyses were done with SPSS 14.
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.
Stylet Slow-Pull Technique group
In patients randomized to the stylet slow-pull techniques an endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy of the pancreatic mass were made with a 20 Gauge needle (EchoTip ProCore 20G with ReCoil Stylet™, Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA): 15 to-and-fro movements within the lesion were performed, with simultaneous minimal negative pressure provided by pulling the needle stylet slowly and continuously.
Stylet slow-pull technique
During endosonographic examination, the pancreatic mass was evaluated with color Doppler to avoid the involvement of vessels. The needle (20 Gauge, EchoTip ProCore 20G with ReCoil Stylet™, Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA) was sharpened by withdrawing the stylet approximately 2 mm, and then was advanced into the lesion: 15 to-and-fro movements within the lesion were performed, with simultaneous minimal negative pressure provided by pulling the needle stylet slowly and continuously.
Standard Suction Technique group
In patients randomized to the standard suction technique an endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy of the pancreatic mass were made with a 20 Gauge needle (EchoTip ProCore 20G with ReCoil Stylet™, Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA): 15 to-and-fro movements within the lesion were performed with the use of a 10-mL suction syringe.
Standard suction technique
During endosonographic examination, the pancreatic mass was evaluated with color Doppler to avoid the involvement of vessels. The needle (20 Gauge, EchoTip ProCore 20G with ReCoil Stylet™, Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA) was sharpened by withdrawing the stylet approximately 2 mm, and then was advanced into the lesion: 15 to-and-fro movements within the lesion were performed using a 10-mL suction syringe.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Stylet slow-pull technique
During endosonographic examination, the pancreatic mass was evaluated with color Doppler to avoid the involvement of vessels. The needle (20 Gauge, EchoTip ProCore 20G with ReCoil Stylet™, Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA) was sharpened by withdrawing the stylet approximately 2 mm, and then was advanced into the lesion: 15 to-and-fro movements within the lesion were performed, with simultaneous minimal negative pressure provided by pulling the needle stylet slowly and continuously.
Standard suction technique
During endosonographic examination, the pancreatic mass was evaluated with color Doppler to avoid the involvement of vessels. The needle (20 Gauge, EchoTip ProCore 20G with ReCoil Stylet™, Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN, USA) was sharpened by withdrawing the stylet approximately 2 mm, and then was advanced into the lesion: 15 to-and-fro movements within the lesion were performed using a 10-mL suction syringe.
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Solid pancreatic lesion on imaging MRI and/or CT-scan referred for tissue acquisition
* Lesion can be visualized with EUS and needle puncturing can be technically feasible
* Able to sign informed consent
Exclusion Criteria
* Cystic pancreatic lesions
* Extra-pancreatic lesions or inaccessible/non-visualized lesions
* Previous gastrectomy
* International normalized ratio \> 1.5
* Impossibility to suspend anticoagulant therapy
* Platelet count \< 50.000 cells/cubic millimeter
* Severe or unstable clinical conditions
* Pregnancy
* Inability to give informed consent
* Refusal to participate to the study
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
ARNAS Civico Di Cristina Benfratelli Hospital
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Roberto Di Mitri
Chief of the Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Unit
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Roberto Di Mitri
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
ARNAS Civico Di Cristina Benfratelli Hospital
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
ARNAS Civico - Di Cristina - Benfratelli Hospital
Palermo, , Italy
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.
1270
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.