Is One Pass Enough for the Diagnosis of the Pancreatic Masses During EUS-FNB?
NCT ID: NCT05436704
Last Updated: 2022-06-29
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
79 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2022-06-21
2024-06-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
To overcome this problem, new EUS-TA needles entered in clinical practice to obtain histological specimens increasing the accuracy of the EUS-TA. Preliminary result with these new needles, called EUS-fine needle biopsy (FNB) are promising with an accuracy rate more than 90%.
Recently, Leungh et al. conducted an observational study to evaluate the role of macroscopic on-site evaluation (MOSE) on the diagnostic accuracy of 22G Franseen-tip needle. The study demonstrated that MOSE using the 22G Franseen tip needle could limit needle passes by accurately estimating histologic core fragments. However, the study limitations such as the small sample size and the lack of control group, hampered the value of the conclusions.
So, nowadays, no definitive data regarding how many needle passes need to be performed with FNB needles, neither regarding the use of MOSE to evaluate the specimens obtained with FNB needle. The MOSE technique of the acquired tissue was proposed for the first time by Iwashita et al, using a 19G needle and is nowadays a well-established technique with high accuracy in the final diagnosis.
The aim of our study is to evaluate if during EUS-FNB of pancreatic masses only one needle pass with MOSE evaluation can be satisfactory to obtain a correct diagnosis.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Macroscopic on Site Evaluation (MOLSE) vs Standard Specimen Acquisition of Solid Lesions During EUS-FNB
NCT04486274
Non-hypovascular Solid Pancreatic Lesions: Role of EUS
NCT03738280
Prospective Study FNB, Is It Time To Abandon Cytological Assessment
NCT04165018
EUS-FNA of Solid Pancreatic Mass: Comparison Between Negative Pressure and Slow-pull Technique
NCT03111368
Standard Versus Fanning Techniques for Endoscopic Ultrasound-Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA)
NCT01501903
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
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.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
EUS-FNB
EUS-FNB
EUS-FNB
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
EUS-FNB
EUS-FNB
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Both in-patient and out-patients.
* Presence of a solid lesion. In the presence of a cystic component, the solid part of the lesion should be more 75% of the total.
* FNB performed by a 22G needle Acquire® (Boston Scientific).
* Tissue acquisition with fanning technique.
* Able to obtained informed consent.
Exclusion Criteria
* Patients underwent EUS-FNB plus ROSE.
* Previous biopsy of the lesion with diagnosis of malignancy
* Presence of an uncorrectable coagulopathy as defined by abnormal prothrombin time (PT) or partial thromboplastin time (PTT) that does not normalize after administration of fresh frozen plasma.
* Pregnancy or breast-feeding.
* Patients unable to understand and/or read the consent form.
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Istituto Clinico Humanitas Mater Domini
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.
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Humanitas-Mater Domini
Castellanza, , Italy
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
07-2022
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.