22G-Adapt vs 22G-Franseen Needle Biopsy in EUS-Guided Tissue Acquisition of Solid Lesions
NCT ID: NCT07012694
Last Updated: 2025-07-01
Study Results
Results pending
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.
Recruitment Status
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Clinical Phase
NA
Total Enrollment
576 participants
Study Classification
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Start Date
2025-07-31
Study Completion Date
2026-12-10
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The investigators conduct a prospective, multicenter, blinded, randomized controlled trial to compare the diagnostic value and safety of the 22G Adapt needle versus the 22G Franseen needle for histopathological evaluation of solid lesions.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
22G-Adapt Needle Biopsy Versus Fine-needle Aspiration in Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Sampling of Solid Lesions
NCT06563232
Pancreatic Neoplasms
Mediastinal Neoplasms
Abdominal Neoplasm, Excluding Pancreas Neoplasm
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
NA
Comparing of a 22G EUS Procore Fine Needle Biopsy Device and a 20G EUS Procore Fine Needle Biopsy Device
NCT03803930
Pancreas Neoplasms
UNKNOWN
NA
The 22G Franseen Needle Combined With Different Aspiration Techniques for Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine-needle Biopsy
NCT07023549
Pancreatic Diseases
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
NA
Diagnostic Yield of 20-gauge Procore Needle for EUS-guided FNA Biopsy in Solid Pancreatic Lesions
NCT02920944
Pancreatic Neoplasms
COMPLETED
NA
A Clinical Trial With a New Needle Device Comparing Two Needles for EUS_FNA of Solid Lesions.
NCT02246322
Pancreatic Cancer
Neuroendocrine Tumors
Lymphadenopathies
+2 more
UNKNOWN
NA
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Participants are randomized into two groups: the EUS-FNB-A group (22G Franseen needle) and the EUS-FNB-B group (22G Adapt needle). The primary endpoint is diagnostic accuracy for solid mass lesions. A non-inferiority design is adopted, with group A as the control. The significance level (α) is set at 0.025 (one-sided), with a type II error (β) of 0.15, providing a statistical power of 85%. Based on previous literature, the assumed diagnostic accuracy of the 22G Adapt FNB is 90%, compared to 92% for the 22G Franseen FNB, with a non-inferiority margin of -10%. Assuming a 1:1 allocation and accounting for a 20% dropout rate, 288 participants are planned for each group, totaling 576 participants.
Done by professional statistical people with randomized block grouping method and SAS 9.4 statistical software to generate randomized serial number（001-576）for the two groups in 1:1 manner. The serial numbers are the randomized grouping numbers for the trial patients, block capacity is 4, totally 144 randomized block. The randomized grouping will be generated in duplicate copies and sealed. One copy send to trial centers for patient allocating, and the another copy be saved by the trial applicant unit. Every trail centers will be responsible for the screening of qualified patients, rank them in visit time to get the randomized grouping number so as to determine them goes to the EUS-FNA or EUS-FNB.The research people and patients in all trial centers should not know the the randomized grouping number and relevant groups. The group name will be sealed under scratch card. Every trial patients will get a unique randomized number, and it will not change through out the whole trial.
Use the inclusion and exclusion criteria to observe the patients and do relative inspections, and confirm if the patients qualified or not to the trial. Record the result of last time test before the treatment. Although it is better to get the informed consent before doing all kinds of observation and tests, if for some reason, the medical imaging examination has completed, as long as the imaging examination was done within 3 weeks before the needle biopsy, it can still be collect as baseline data (imaging examination can be done at other hospitals, but the trial center should issue a new evaluation report 1 week before the patient join the trial group); other lab test items done at 2 weeks before the needle biopsy can still be collect as baseline data for pre-research use, but these tests should be done at the trail center hospital so as to guarantee the data trace ability.
The investigators will do the needle passes for 2 times for all of them:the 1 needle passes with Slow-Pull and the 2 needle passes with 5 mL wet suction. If no core tissues obtained or the operator/onsite pathologist determine insufficient specimen after the operations above, then remedy procedures will be done, the operator use proper puncture method to continue the remedy biopsy. After the first round of needle biopsy, if the trial patient cannot be diagnosed, by getting the agreement of the patient, the patient will be cross-over to another trial group and do needle biopsy again on the same lesion 1 week later with the method mentioned above. Without knowing the needle biopsy type, the cytologist and pathologist evaluate the specimen quality and make diagnosis. Every specimen will be independently evaluated and diagnosed by 2 experts. If the 2 experts have different judgments, then these two experts discuss together and make the final diagnose discussion. If the same sample has 2 or more cytology smear slides, than take the highest score slide as the result. Follow up (outpatient follow up or telephone follow up) the patients at 1 week, 12 weeks and 36 weeks after the needle biopsy and collect the patients clinical data and confirm their final diagnosis.
During the trial, if severe adverse event occurs, the trialed center must take immediate actions necessary to guarantee the trialed patients' safety. Once severe adverse event occurs, the researchers should inform the trial applicant and the trail center's ethics committee within 24 hours after the researchers gets to know the adverse event. And the researchers should also fax the report to State Food and Drug Administration of China and the local provincial food and drug administration. After receiving the report, the applicant should inform other clinical trial centers within 24 hours. All the severe adverse events should be filed at group leader medical center and other trial centers.
Case Report Form (CRF ) will be filled by the researchers, every involved patient must have the CRF filled. This will be audited by clinical monitor and handed over to data administrator to input and manage data, the first copy will be kept by the applicant, the second copy will go to the trial center, and the third copy will be kept by the trail researchers. The data input and management will be taken care by specially assigned person. In order to guarantee the data accuracy, data input will be done twice by two independent data administrators, by computerized and manual verifying, hand over the data to statistical experts to do blind check and statistic analyzing.For the questions and doubts within the case report form, the data administrator make Data Resolution Query (DRQ) and via the clinical monitor asking the researchers. The researchers will answer and feed back as soon as possible. According to the researchers answer, data administrator will do the data modifying, confirming or inputting, and when necessary send out DRQ again.After blind audition and confirming that the established data base is correct, major researchers, applicant and the statistic analyzing people lock the data. The locked data will not be changed, and the data base will be handed over to statistical analyzer to do the statistic analyze according to the statistic analyzing plan. Problems found after data locking can be modified during the statistic analyzing procedure.This will be done by specialized statistic analyzing people according to the predetermined statistic analyzing plan. The statistic analyze will be carried out according to intention principle confirmed full analysis set and per-protocol set principle. After completing the statistic analyzing, the statistic analyzer issue the statistic analysis report and send this to major researchers to write the study report.
Statistic analyzing plan:⑴ General principle:① all the statistic tests are use the two-tailed-test method, P\<0.05 will be thought as the tested difference is statistical significance. ② the quantitative indicator description will calculate the Mean and Standard deviation. The classification indicator description will describe the cases and percentage of all types of cases. ⑵ Statistic analyzing method:① for the measurement data, compare it with the baseline value at selection period, use paired t-test or symbol rank sum test to compare with the before-after-difference within the group.② for the counting data, use x2 test or Fisher's exact test method to compare the groups. ⑶ Shedding analysis:Comparison of groups'total shedding rates and the shedding rates caused by adverse events will use x2 test or Fisher's exact test method. ⑷ The baseline value's equilibrium analysis: Use group t test or x2 test to compare the demography info and vital signs, disease history, and basic treatment and other indicators of baseline value, so as to measure the balance of the groups. The baseline evaluation will be done on Full Analysis Set (FAS) and Per-Protocol Set ( PPS). ⑸ Effectiveness analysis:The major indicator of effectiveness analysis is the diagnostic accuracy on malignant disease, and the indicators of second effectiveness include the percentage of Grade A specimen and complications rate etc. while the two groups rate and the Youden index comparison will use approximate normal Z test or use central effect x2 test.(6) Safety analysis:Use x2 test or Fisher's exact test to compare the adverse event/adverse reaction (include biopsy complications) rates between the groups. And use table to describe the adverse events during this trial project; the lab test results before and after the trial, the normal/abnormal changing condition and the relationship with this trial research when abnormal changes happened.
Done by professional statistical people with randomized block grouping method and SAS 9.4 statistical software to generate randomized serial number（001-576）for the two groups in 1:1 manner. The serial numbers are the randomized grouping numbers for the trial patients, block capacity is 4, totally 144 randomized block. The randomized grouping will be generated in duplicate copies and sealed. One copy send to trial centers for patient allocating, and the another copy be saved by the trial applicant unit. Every trail centers will be responsible for the screening of qualified patients, rank them in visit time to get the randomized grouping number so as to determine them goes to the EUS-FNA or EUS-FNB.The research people and patients in all trial centers should not know the the randomized grouping number and relevant groups. The group name will be sealed under scratch card. Every trial patients will get a unique randomized number, and it will not change through out the whole trial.
Use the inclusion and exclusion criteria to observe the patients and do relative inspections, and confirm if the patients qualified or not to the trial. Record the result of last time test before the treatment. Although it is better to get the informed consent before doing all kinds of observation and tests, if for some reason, the medical imaging examination has completed, as long as the imaging examination was done within 3 weeks before the needle biopsy, it can still be collect as baseline data (imaging examination can be done at other hospitals, but the trial center should issue a new evaluation report 1 week before the patient join the trial group); other lab test items done at 2 weeks before the needle biopsy can still be collect as baseline data for pre-research use, but these tests should be done at the trail center hospital so as to guarantee the data trace ability.
The investigators will do the needle passes for 2 times for all of them:the 1 needle passes with Slow-Pull and the 2 needle passes with 5 mL wet suction. If no core tissues obtained or the operator/onsite pathologist determine insufficient specimen after the operations above, then remedy procedures will be done, the operator use proper puncture method to continue the remedy biopsy. After the first round of needle biopsy, if the trial patient cannot be diagnosed, by getting the agreement of the patient, the patient will be cross-over to another trial group and do needle biopsy again on the same lesion 1 week later with the method mentioned above. Without knowing the needle biopsy type, the cytologist and pathologist evaluate the specimen quality and make diagnosis. Every specimen will be independently evaluated and diagnosed by 2 experts. If the 2 experts have different judgments, then these two experts discuss together and make the final diagnose discussion. If the same sample has 2 or more cytology smear slides, than take the highest score slide as the result. Follow up (outpatient follow up or telephone follow up) the patients at 1 week, 12 weeks and 36 weeks after the needle biopsy and collect the patients clinical data and confirm their final diagnosis.
During the trial, if severe adverse event occurs, the trialed center must take immediate actions necessary to guarantee the trialed patients' safety. Once severe adverse event occurs, the researchers should inform the trial applicant and the trail center's ethics committee within 24 hours after the researchers gets to know the adverse event. And the researchers should also fax the report to State Food and Drug Administration of China and the local provincial food and drug administration. After receiving the report, the applicant should inform other clinical trial centers within 24 hours. All the severe adverse events should be filed at group leader medical center and other trial centers.
Case Report Form (CRF ) will be filled by the researchers, every involved patient must have the CRF filled. This will be audited by clinical monitor and handed over to data administrator to input and manage data, the first copy will be kept by the applicant, the second copy will go to the trial center, and the third copy will be kept by the trail researchers. The data input and management will be taken care by specially assigned person. In order to guarantee the data accuracy, data input will be done twice by two independent data administrators, by computerized and manual verifying, hand over the data to statistical experts to do blind check and statistic analyzing.For the questions and doubts within the case report form, the data administrator make Data Resolution Query (DRQ) and via the clinical monitor asking the researchers. The researchers will answer and feed back as soon as possible. According to the researchers answer, data administrator will do the data modifying, confirming or inputting, and when necessary send out DRQ again.After blind audition and confirming that the established data base is correct, major researchers, applicant and the statistic analyzing people lock the data. The locked data will not be changed, and the data base will be handed over to statistical analyzer to do the statistic analyze according to the statistic analyzing plan. Problems found after data locking can be modified during the statistic analyzing procedure.This will be done by specialized statistic analyzing people according to the predetermined statistic analyzing plan. The statistic analyze will be carried out according to intention principle confirmed full analysis set and per-protocol set principle. After completing the statistic analyzing, the statistic analyzer issue the statistic analysis report and send this to major researchers to write the study report.
Statistic analyzing plan:⑴ General principle:① all the statistic tests are use the two-tailed-test method, P\<0.05 will be thought as the tested difference is statistical significance. ② the quantitative indicator description will calculate the Mean and Standard deviation. The classification indicator description will describe the cases and percentage of all types of cases. ⑵ Statistic analyzing method:① for the measurement data, compare it with the baseline value at selection period, use paired t-test or symbol rank sum test to compare with the before-after-difference within the group.② for the counting data, use x2 test or Fisher's exact test method to compare the groups. ⑶ Shedding analysis:Comparison of groups'total shedding rates and the shedding rates caused by adverse events will use x2 test or Fisher's exact test method. ⑷ The baseline value's equilibrium analysis: Use group t test or x2 test to compare the demography info and vital signs, disease history, and basic treatment and other indicators of baseline value, so as to measure the balance of the groups. The baseline evaluation will be done on Full Analysis Set (FAS) and Per-Protocol Set ( PPS). ⑸ Effectiveness analysis:The major indicator of effectiveness analysis is the diagnostic accuracy on malignant disease, and the indicators of second effectiveness include the percentage of Grade A specimen and complications rate etc. while the two groups rate and the Youden index comparison will use approximate normal Z test or use central effect x2 test.(6) Safety analysis:Use x2 test or Fisher's exact test to compare the adverse event/adverse reaction (include biopsy complications) rates between the groups. And use table to describe the adverse events during this trial project; the lab test results before and after the trial, the normal/abnormal changing condition and the relationship with this trial research when abnormal changes happened.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Pancreatic Neoplasms
Mediastinal Neoplasms
Abdominal Neoplasm, Excluding Pancreas Neoplasm
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
Allocation Method
RANDOMIZED
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Primary Study Purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Blinding Strategy
SINGLE
Outcome Assessors
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
22G Franseen Needle Group
22G Franseen needles were adopted to acquire lesion tissues
Group Type
EXPERIMENTAL
22G Franseen Needle Group
Intervention Type
DEVICE
Fine-needle-biopsy (22G Franseen, Boston Scientific, Winston-Salem, USA)
22G Adapt Needle Group
22G Adapt needles were adopted to acquire lesion tissues
Group Type
EXPERIMENTAL
22G Adapt Needle Group
Intervention Type
DEVICE
Fine-needle-biopsy (22G Adapt, Micro.Tech Endoscopy, Nanjing, China)
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
22G Franseen Needle Group
Fine-needle-biopsy (22G Franseen, Boston Scientific, Winston-Salem, USA)
Intervention Type
DEVICE
22G Adapt Needle Group
Fine-needle-biopsy (22G Adapt, Micro.Tech Endoscopy, Nanjing, China)
Intervention Type
DEVICE
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Over 18 years old and under 85 years old;
* Presence of a solid lesion greater than 1 cm in diameter, as identified by cross-sectional imaging (Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Computed Tomography or abdominal ultrasound), located in anatomical regions accessible via endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-including but not limited to the pancreas, retroperitoneum, liver, mediastinum, or subepithelial layers of the gastrointestinal tract-where tissue acquisition is clinically indicated to establish a definitive histopathological diagnosis.;
* Must be able to receive examinations in the research center;
* Must be able to sign the informed consent.
* Presence of a solid lesion greater than 1 cm in diameter, as identified by cross-sectional imaging (Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Computed Tomography or abdominal ultrasound), located in anatomical regions accessible via endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-including but not limited to the pancreas, retroperitoneum, liver, mediastinum, or subepithelial layers of the gastrointestinal tract-where tissue acquisition is clinically indicated to establish a definitive histopathological diagnosis.;
* Must be able to receive examinations in the research center;
* Must be able to sign the informed consent.
Exclusion Criteria
* Hemoglobin ≤8.0 g/dL;
* Pregnant women;
* Coagulation disorders(Platelet \<50,000/mm3, International Normalized Ratio \> 1.5);
* Took anticoagulants such as aspirin, warfarin in the latest week;
* Acute pancreatitis in the past two weeks;
* inability to safely perform Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition (eg, cardiorespiratory dysfunction, mental diseases, or drug addiction); refusal or inability to provide an informed consent.
* Pregnant women;
* Coagulation disorders(Platelet \<50,000/mm3, International Normalized Ratio \> 1.5);
* Took anticoagulants such as aspirin, warfarin in the latest week;
* Acute pancreatitis in the past two weeks;
* inability to safely perform Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition (eg, cardiorespiratory dysfunction, mental diseases, or drug addiction); refusal or inability to provide an informed consent.
Minimum Eligible Age
18 Years
Maximum Eligible Age
85 Years
Eligible Sex
ALL
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
The Affiliated Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
The First People's Hospital of Yunnan
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
The First Affiliated Hospital of University of Science and Technology of China
OTHER
Sponsor Role
collaborator
Huazhong University of Science and Technology
OTHER
Sponsor Role
lead
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Bin Cheng
prof.
Responsibility Role
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Bin Cheng
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Tongji Hospital
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology
Wuhan, Hubei, China
Site Status
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
China
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.
Gkolfakis P, Crino SF, Tziatzios G, Ramai D, Papaefthymiou A, Papanikolaou IS, Triantafyllou K, Arvanitakis M, Lisotti A, Fusaroli P, Mangiavillano B, Carrara S, Repici A, Hassan C, Facciorusso A. Comparative diagnostic performance of end-cutting fine-needle biopsy needles for EUS tissue sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2022 Jun;95(6):1067-1077.e15. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2022.01.019. Epub 2022 Feb 4.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
van Riet PA, Erler NS, Bruno MJ, Cahen DL. Comparison of fine-needle aspiration and fine-needle biopsy devices for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid lesions: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy. 2021 Apr;53(4):411-423. doi: 10.1055/a-1206-5552. Epub 2020 Aug 6.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Facciorusso A, Arvanitakis M, Crino SF, Fabbri C, Fornelli A, Leeds J, Archibugi L, Carrara S, Dhar J, Gkolfakis P, Haugk B, Iglesias Garcia J, Napoleon B, Papanikolaou IS, Seicean A, Stassen PMC, Vilmann P, Tham TC, Fuccio L. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue sampling: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Technical and Technology Review. Endoscopy. 2025 Apr;57(4):390-418. doi: 10.1055/a-2524-2596. Epub 2025 Feb 27.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Kovacevic B, Toxvaerd A, Klausen P, Larsen MH, Grutzmeier S, Detlefsen S, Karstensen JG, Brink L, Hassan H, Hogdall E, Vilmann P. Tissue amount and diagnostic yield of a novel franseen EUS-FNB and a standard EUS-FNA needle-A randomized controlled study in solid pancreatic lesions. Endosc Ultrasound. 2023 May-Jun;12(3):319-325. doi: 10.1097/eus.0000000000000007. Epub 2023 Jul 25.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Ashat M, Klair JS, Rooney SL, Vishal SJ, Jensen C, Sahar N, Murali AR, El-Abiad R, Gerke H. Randomized controlled trial comparing the Franseen needle with the Fork-tip needle for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021 Jan;93(1):140-150.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.05.057. Epub 2020 Jun 9.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Kurita A, Yasukawa S, Zen Y, Yoshimura K, Ogura T, Ozawa E, Okabe Y, Asada M, Nebiki H, Shigekawa M, Ikeura T, Eguchi T, Maruyama H, Ueki T, Itonaga M, Hashimoto S, Shiomi H, Minami R, Hoki N, Takenaka M, Itokawa Y, Uza N, Hashigo S, Yasuda H, Takada R, Kamada H, Kawamoto H, Kawakami H, Moriyama I, Fujita K, Matsumoto H, Hanada K, Takemura T, Yazumi S. Comparison of a 22-gauge Franseen-tip needle with a 20-gauge forward-bevel needle for the diagnosis of type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter study (COMPAS study). Gastrointest Endosc. 2020 Feb;91(2):373-381.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.10.012. Epub 2019 Oct 22.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Pouw RE, Barret M, Biermann K, Bisschops R, Czako L, Gecse KB, de Hertogh G, Hucl T, Iacucci M, Jansen M, Rutter M, Savarino E, Spaander MCW, Schmidt PT, Vieth M, Dinis-Ribeiro M, van Hooft JE. Endoscopic tissue sampling - Part 1: Upper gastrointestinal and hepatopancreatobiliary tracts. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. Endoscopy. 2021 Nov;53(11):1174-1188. doi: 10.1055/a-1611-5091. Epub 2021 Sep 17.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Cheng B, Zhang Y, Chen Q, Sun B, Deng Z, Shan H, Dou L, Wang J, Li Y, Yang X, Jiang T, Xu G, Wang G. Analysis of Fine-Needle Biopsy vs Fine-Needle Aspiration in Diagnosis of Pancreatic and Abdominal Masses: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Aug;16(8):1314-1321. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.07.010. Epub 2017 Jul 19.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Oh D, Kong J, Ko SW, Hong SM, So H, Hwang JS, Song TJ, Lee SK, Kim MH, Lee SS. A comparison between 25-gauge and 22-gauge Franseen needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of pancreatic and peripancreatic masses: a randomized non-inferiority study. Endoscopy. 2021 Nov;53(11):1122-1129. doi: 10.1055/a-1369-8610. Epub 2021 Mar 2.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Gerke H, Rizk MK, Vanderheyden AD, Jensen CS. Randomized study comparing endoscopic ultrasound-guided Trucut biopsy and fine needle aspiration with high suction. Cytopathology. 2010 Feb;21(1):44-51. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2303.2009.00656.x. Epub 2009 May 18.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
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.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Crino SF, Conti Bellocchi MC, Di Mitri R, Inzani F, Rimbas M, Lisotti A, Manfredi G, Teoh AYB, Mangiavillano B, Sendino O, Bernardoni L, Manfrin E, Scimeca D, Unti E, Carlino A, Voiosu T, Mateescu RB, Fusaroli P, Lega S, Buscarini E, Pergola L, Chan SM, Lamonaca L, Gines A, Fernandez-Esparrach G, Facciorusso A, Larghi A. Wet-suction versus slow-pull technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy: a multicenter, randomized, crossover trial. Endoscopy. 2023 Mar;55(3):225-234. doi: 10.1055/a-1915-1812. Epub 2022 Aug 1.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
Franseen FNB vs Adapt FNB 2025
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.
Prospective Multi-center, Single Blinded, Randomized, Controlled Trial of EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA on Solid Occupying Lesion
NCT02327065
UNKNOWN
NA
The 22G Trident Needle Combined With Different Aspiration Techniques for Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine-needle Biopsy
NCT07023562
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
NA
Evaluation of EUS-Guided 22 Gauge Core Biopsy Versus Fine-needle Aspiration for Suspected Pancreatic Neoplasms
NCT01673334
COMPLETED
PHASE4
Comparison of Three Tissue Acquiring Techniques During EUS Guided Biopsies of Solid Tumors.
NCT03264092
TERMINATED
NA
RCT Comparing Accuracy Among Franseen, Forward-bevel Westcott, and Fork-tip EUS-FNB Needle in Diagnosis of Solid Pancreatic Lesions
NCT07032974
RECRUITING
NA
Comparison of FNB to EUS-CNB for Pancreatic Lesions
NCT07240818
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
NA
Modified Wet Suction Versus Capillary Techniques for EUS Guided Fine Needle Aspiration and Biopsy of Solid Lesions
NCT02919553
WITHDRAWN
NA
22G FNA Needle vs. 22G ProCore Needle
NCT01394159
COMPLETED
NA
Prospective Trial of EUS-FNA Versus EUS-FNB Using a Novel Core Biopsy Needle
NCT01769248
COMPLETED
NA
Yield Rate for Procurement the Histologic Core With Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine Needle Biopsy With 20-gauge Ultrasound Biopsy Needles for Solid Pancreatic Masses: Pilot Study
NCT03017599
COMPLETED
NA
Comparing the Efficacy of Endoscopic FNA vs FNB in Diagnosing Solid Gastrointestinal Lesions
NCT01698190
UNKNOWN
NA
EUS-guided Fine Needle Aspiration (EUS-FNA) Versus EUS-guided Fine Needle Biopsy (EUS-FNB) for Diagnosis of Subepithelial Tumors
NCT02943837
WITHDRAWN
NA
A Multi-center, Prospective, Single-blind, Controlled Trial Comparing Diagnostic Value of Different EUS-FNA Techniques
NCT03674710
UNKNOWN
NA
Comparing the Franseen and Fork-top Needles for EUS-guided Fine-needle Biopsy of Solid Mass Lesions.
NCT03561038
WITHDRAWN
NA
Fine-needle Biopsy Combined With Macroscopic On-site Evaluation for Diagnosis of Solid Pancreatic Lesions
NCT06994611
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
NA
Comparing the Diagnostic Adequacy of 25-gauge Fork-tip, Franseen and Reverse-bevel Type Needles in Endoscopic Ultrasound Guided Tissue Acquisition
NCT05434247
COMPLETED
NA
Comparsion of WT and SNP Techniques of EUS-FNB in Pancreatic Solid Mass (WESP-PSM)
NCT04605042
UNKNOWN
NA
EUS-guided Fine Needle Aspiration (FNA) With and Without the Use of a Stylet
NCT01316614
COMPLETED
NA
Study Comparing Pancreatic EUS-FNB With the 20-gauge Procore® and the 22-gauge Acquire® Needles
NCT03567863
COMPLETED
NA
Evaluation of the Synergistic Impact of Needle and Forceps Biopsy With Electromagnetic Navigation Bronchoscopy
NCT05110131
ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
NA
Comparison of EUS-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration Technique
NCT01923883
UNKNOWN
NA
Impact of Suction in the EUS-guided Fine Needle Biopsy of Solid Pancreatic Lesions
NCT04164017
UNKNOWN
NA
Endoscopic Ultrasonography (EUS) Guided Fine Needle Aspiration Using Free Stylet 22g and 25 g Needles
NCT01543282
COMPLETED
NA
Comparison Between Olympus EZ Shot 3Plus 19G and EZ Shot 2 19G in EUS-guided FNB of Solid Pancreatic Masses
NCT02909530
COMPLETED
NA
EUS-FNA With 22G Procore Needles vs 22G Conventional Needles
NCT01581762
COMPLETED
PHASE3