Comparison of EUS-FNB Biopsy Techniques of Solid Pancreatic Lesions
NCT ID: NCT04843956
Last Updated: 2021-04-14
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.
UNKNOWN
NA
41 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2020-01-08
2021-04-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
From the results obtained from the pathology service, 3 variables will be assessed; Cellularity, blood contamination and suitability for a diagnosis.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Multicentered Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial For Solid Pancreatic Lesions
NCT04841616
Impact of Suction in the EUS-guided Fine Needle Biopsy of Solid Pancreatic Lesions
NCT04164017
Standard Versus Fanning Techniques for Endoscopic Ultrasound-Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA)
NCT01501903
EUS-FNB for Solid Pancreatic Lesions: Side-fenestrated Vs Fork-tip Needle
NCT03622229
Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration (FNA) With Rapid On-site Evaluation (ROSE) of Cytopathology vs. EUS-guided Fine Needle Biopsy (FNB) Alone in the Diagnosis of Pancreatic Solid Lesions
NCT03435588
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The passes will be in three different ways to compare.
1. Capillary with suction (puncture with gradual withdrawal of the stylet, applying dry suction with a 10 ml air vacuum syringe after removing the stylet)
2. Capillary without suction (puncture with removal of the stylet gradually, without suction after removing the stylet)
3. Moist suction (Before the puncture, the stylet is removed from the needle and irrigated with 1-2 ml saline solution to replace the air column with liquid, then the solid lesion is punctured and suction is placed with a vacuum syringe of 10 ml of air)
The quality of the biopsy will be evaluated by the pathologist independently and without knowing how the sample was obtained.
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.
NA
SINGLE_GROUP
DIAGNOSTIC
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Patients with solid pancreatic lesions
Patients who will undergo endoscopic ultrasound biopsy. Samples of at least 3 passes will be obtained, each pass obtained with a different technique (capillary with suction, capillary without suction and wet suction)
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy
Capillary with suction (puncture with gradual withdrawal of the stylet, applying dry suction with a 10 ml air vacuum syringe after removing the stylet)
Capillary without suction (puncture with removal of the stylet gradually, without suction after removing the stylet)
wet suction (Prior to puncture, the stylet is removed from the needle and irrigated with 1-2 ml saline solution to replace the air column with liquid, then the solid lesion is punctured and suction is placed with a 10 ml vacuum syringe of air)
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biopsy
Capillary with suction (puncture with gradual withdrawal of the stylet, applying dry suction with a 10 ml air vacuum syringe after removing the stylet)
Capillary without suction (puncture with removal of the stylet gradually, without suction after removing the stylet)
wet suction (Prior to puncture, the stylet is removed from the needle and irrigated with 1-2 ml saline solution to replace the air column with liquid, then the solid lesion is punctured and suction is placed with a 10 ml vacuum syringe of air)
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
* Any gender.
* Patients with solid pancreatic lesions evidenced by CT or MRI who do not have a histopathological diagnosis.
Exclusion Criteria
* Pancreatic lesions with a cystic component.
* Alteration of coagulation parameters (INR\> 1.5, Platelets \<50,000 / mm3) or having taken antiplatelet agents or oral anticoagulants one week prior to the biopsy.
* History of acute pancreatitis in the last 4 weeks.
* Pregnant
* Refusal or inability to sign informed consent
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Hospital Universitario Dr. Jose E. Gonzalez
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Dr. med. Hector Eloy Tamez Perez
Clinical profesor
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Héctor Miguel Delgado Cortes
Monterrey, Nuevo León, Mexico
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Lee YN, Moon JH, Kim HK, Choi HJ, Choi MH, Kim DC, Lee TH, Cha SW, Cho YD, Park SH. Core biopsy needle versus standard aspiration needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a randomized parallel-group study. Endoscopy. 2014 Dec;46(12):1056-62. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1377558. Epub 2014 Aug 6.
Crino SF, Manfrin E, Scarpa A, Baldaque-Silva F, Carrara S, De Nucci G, Di Mitri R, Gines A, Iglesias-Garcia J, Itoi T, Kitano M, Nguyen NQ, Deprez PH, Poley JW, Shami VM, Tarantino I, Larghi A. EUS-FNB with or without on-site evaluation for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions (FROSENOR): Protocol for a multicenter randomized non-inferiority trial. Dig Liver Dis. 2019 Jun;51(6):901-906. doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2019.03.008. Epub 2019 Apr 8.
Bor R, Vasas B, Fabian A, Balint A, Farkas K, Milassin A, Czako L, Rutka M, Molnar T, Szucs M, Tiszlavicz L, Kaizer L, Hamar S, Szepes Z. Prospective comparison of slow-pull and standard suction techniques of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic cancer. BMC Gastroenterol. 2019 Jan 9;19(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s12876-018-0921-9.
Aadam AA, Oh YS, Shidham VB, Khan A, Hunt B, Rao N, Zhang Y, Tarima S, Dua KS. Eliminating the Residual Negative Pressure in the Endoscopic Ultrasound Aspirating Needle Enhances Cytology Yield of Pancreas Masses. Dig Dis Sci. 2016 Mar;61(3):890-9. doi: 10.1007/s10620-015-3860-0. Epub 2015 Sep 7.
Lee JK, Choi JH, Lee KH, Kim KM, Shin JU, Lee JK, Lee KT, Jang KT. A prospective, comparative trial to optimize sampling techniques in EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses. Gastrointest Endosc. 2013 May;77(5):745-51. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.12.009. Epub 2013 Feb 21.
Kudo T, Kawakami H, Hayashi T, Yasuda I, Mukai T, Inoue H, Katanuma A, Kawakubo K, Ishiwatari H, Doi S, Yamada R, Maguchi H, Isayama H, Mitsuhashi T, Sakamoto N; Japan EUS-FNA Negative Pressure Suction Study Group. High and low negative pressure suction techniques in EUS-guided fine-needle tissue acquisition by using 25-gauge needles: a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014 Dec;80(6):1030-7.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.04.012. Epub 2014 Jun 2.
Bansal RK, Choudhary NS, Puri R, Patle SK, Bhagat S, Nasa M, Bhasin A, Sarin H, Guleria M, Sud R. Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration by capillary action, suction, and no suction methods: a randomized blinded study. Endosc Int Open. 2017 Oct;5(10):E980-E984. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-116383. Epub 2017 Oct 4.
Li H, Li W, Zhou QY, Fan B. Fine needle biopsy is superior to fine needle aspiration in endoscopic ultrasound guided sampling of pancreatic masses: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Mar;97(13):e0207. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000010207.
Polkowski M, Jenssen C, Kaye P, Carrara S, Deprez P, Gines A, Fernandez-Esparrach G, Eisendrath P, Aithal GP, Arcidiacono P, Barthet M, Bastos P, Fornelli A, Napoleon B, Iglesias-Garcia J, Seicean A, Larghi A, Hassan C, van Hooft JE, Dumonceau JM. Technical aspects of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided sampling in gastroenterology: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Technical Guideline - March 2017. Endoscopy. 2017 Oct;49(10):989-1006. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-119219. Epub 2017 Sep 12.
Ge PS, Wani S, Watson RR, Sedarat A, Kim S, Marshall C, Wilson RH, Makker J, Mohamadnejad M, Komanduri S, Muthusamy VR. Per-Pass Performance Characteristics of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration of Malignant Solid Pancreatic Masses in a Large Multicenter Cohort. Pancreas. 2018 Mar;47(3):296-301. doi: 10.1097/MPA.0000000000001003.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
GA19-00014
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.