Clinical Trial Record

Return to Clinical Trials

Comparation Between Needles for EUS-guided Sampling of Solid Pancreatic Lesions


2020-11-26


2022-11


2023-04


50

Study Overview

Comparation Between Needles for EUS-guided Sampling of Solid Pancreatic Lesions

This is a randomized study in order to compare the diagnostic yield (primary outcome) of EUS-guided sampling of pancreatic solid lesions obtained with the 25-gauge Franseen and the 25-gauge standard needle in patients undergoing EUS-guided sampling of pancreatic solid masses without ROSE. Secondary outcomes are the number of extra passes with each needle required to reach adequate core, possibility to perform immunohistochemistry and the adverse event rate.

This is a randomized trial conducted at a unique center. The aim of this study is to compare the diagnostic yield (primary outcome) of EUS-guided sampling of pancreatic solid lesions obtained with the 25-gauge Franseen and the 25-gauge standard needle in patients undergoing EUS-guided sampling of pancreatic solid masses without ROSE. Secondary outcomes are the number of extra passes with each needle required to reach adequate core, possibility to perform immunohistochemistry and the adverse event rate. Patients with a suspected solid pancreatic lesion larger than 15 mm, identified by CT or MRI and referred to EUS-guided sampling will be eligible for inclusion. Patients will be excluded in case of cystic lesion, or the lesion was not detected in EUS, or if the coagulation parameters are abnormal (INR> 2, platelet count < 50,000). The pancreatic mass will be puncture, for expert endoscopist, firstly with a needle according to randomization, followed by another one. Will be make a touch print with the specimen obtained with the needles and, subsequently, all the specimen will be put in formaldehyde solution for cell-block analysis. Diagnostic yield of cell block will be defined as enough histologic tissue core containing pancreatic parenchyma or tumor with dysplastic cells enough for the correct tissue diagnosis. In the presence of malignant tissue in core specimens, it will be calculated the proportion of the area positive for malignancy compared to the total area of the core and then the each needle yield will be defined.

  • Pancreatic Neoplasms
  • DEVICE: needle punction
  • 26962419.3.0000.0065

Study Record Dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Registration Dates Results Reporting Dates Study Record Updates

2021-04-20  

N/A  

2021-05-03  

2021-05-03  

N/A  

2021-05-07  

2021-05-07  

N/A  

2021-05  

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

Design Details

Primary Purpose:
Diagnostic


Allocation:
Randomized


Interventional Model:
Parallel


Masking:
Double


Arms and Interventions

Participant Group/ArmIntervention/Treatment
OTHER: Standard FNA 22G needle

The pancreatic mass will be puncture, for expert endoscopist, with a standard FNA 22G needle

DEVICE: needle punction

  • EUS-guided sampling of pancreatic solid lesions obtained with the 22-gauge
EXPERIMENTAL: Franseen 22G needle

The pancreatic mass will be puncture, for expert endoscopist, with a FNB 22G needle. The sequence of the use of needles will be randomized.

DEVICE: needle punction

  • EUS-guided sampling of pancreatic solid lesions obtained with the 22-gauge
Primary Outcome MeasuresMeasure DescriptionTime Frame
Compare the diagnostic yieldcompare the diagnostic yield between two EUS needles2 years
Secondary Outcome MeasuresMeasure DescriptionTime Frame
extra passes with each needlenumber of extra passes with each needle required to reach adequate core, possibility to perform immunohistochemistry2 years
perform immunohistochemistryneed to perform immunohistochemistry to reach the result2 years
adverse event rateto assess the adverse event rate2 years

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Name: FAUZE MALUF-FILHO, PHD

Phone Number: +55 (11)38932000

Email: fauze.maluf@terra.om.br

Study Contact Backup

Name: GABRIELA PADUANI, MD

Phone Number: +55(11)944605119

Email: gabrielapaduani@gmail.com

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person’s general health condition or prior treatments.

Ages Eligible for Study:
ALL

Sexes Eligible for Study:
18 Years

Accepts Healthy Volunteers:

    Inclusion Criteria:
    - solid pancreatic lesion larger than 15 mm
    Exclusion Criteria:

  • pancreatic cystic lesion
  • lesion not detected in EUS
  • abnormal coagulation parameters (INR> 2, platelet count < 50,000)

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

  • Boston Scientific Corporation

  • PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR: FAUZE MALUF-FILHO, PHD, ICESP/FMUSP

Publications

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

  • Madhoun MF, Wani SB, Rastogi A, Early D, Gaddam S, Tierney WM, Maple JT. The diagnostic accuracy of 22-gauge and 25-gauge needles in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: a meta-analysis. Endoscopy. 2013;45(2):86-92. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1325992. Epub 2013 Jan 10.
  • Puri R, Vilmann P, Saftoiu A, Skov BG, Linnemann D, Hassan H, Garcia ES, Gorunescu F. Randomized controlled trial of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle sampling with or without suction for better cytological diagnosis. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2009;44(4):499-504. doi: 10.1080/00365520802647392.
  • Wani S, Early D, Kunkel J, Leathersich A, Hovis CE, Hollander TG, Kohlmeier C, Zelenka C, Azar R, Edmundowicz S, Collins B, Liu J, Hall M, Mullady D. Diagnostic yield of malignancy during EUS-guided FNA of solid lesions with and without a stylet: a prospective, single blind, randomized, controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012 Aug;76(2):328-35. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.03.1395. Epub 2012 Jun 12.
  • Itoi T, Sofuni A, Itokawa F, Irisawa A, Khor CJ, Rerknimitr R. Current status of diagnostic endoscopic ultrasonography in the evaluation of pancreatic mass lesions. Dig Endosc. 2011 May;23 Suppl 1:17-21. doi: 10.1111/j.1443-1661.2011.01132.x.
  • Levy MJ. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided trucut biopsy of the pancreas: prospects and problems. Pancreatology. 2007;7(2-3):163-6. doi: 10.1159/000104240. Epub 2007 Jun 21.
  • Fabbri C, Polifemo AM, Luigiano C, Cennamo V, Baccarini P, Collina G, Fornelli A, Macchia S, Zanini N, Jovine E, Fiscaletti M, Alibrandi A, D'Imperio N. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration with 22- and 25-gauge needles in solid pancreatic masses: a prospective comparative study with randomisation of needle sequence. Dig Liver Dis. 2011 Aug;43(8):647-52. doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2011.04.005. Epub 2011 May 17.
  • Wang Y, Chen Q, Wang J, Wu X, Duan Y, Yin P, Guo Q, Hou W, Cheng B. Comparison of modified wet suction technique and dry suction technique in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for solid lesions: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2018 Jan 17;19(1):45. doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-2380-y.
  • Kim HJ, Jung YS, Park JH, Park DI, Cho YK, Sohn CI, Jeon WK, Kim BI, Choi KY, Ryu S. Endosonographer's macroscopic evaluation of EUS-FNAB specimens after interactive cytopathologic training: a single-center prospective validation cohort study. Surg Endosc. 2016 Oct;30(10):4184-92. doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4727-3. Epub 2016 Jan 7.
  • Sadaf S, Loya A, Akhtar N, Yusuf MA. Role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided-fine needle aspiration biopsy in the diagnosis of lymphoma of the pancreas: A clinicopathological study of nine cases. Cytopathology. 2017 Dec;28(6):536-541. doi: 10.1111/cyt.12442. Epub 2017 Jul 24.
  • Mohanty SK, Pradhan D, Sharma S, Sharma A, Patnaik N, Feuerman M, Bonasara R, Boyd A, Friedel D, Stavropoulos S, Gupta M. Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration: What variables influence diagnostic yield? Diagn Cytopathol. 2018 Apr;46(4):293-298. doi: 10.1002/dc.23883. Epub 2017 Dec 27.
  • Vilmann P, Jacobsen GK, Henriksen FW, Hancke S. Endoscopic ultrasonography with guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in pancreatic disease. Gastrointest Endosc. 1992 Mar-Apr;38(2):172-3. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(92)70385-x. No abstract available.
  • Iglesias-Garcia J, Dominguez-Munoz JE, Abdulkader I, Larino-Noia J, Eugenyeva E, Lozano-Leon A, Forteza-Vila J. Influence of on-site cytopathology evaluation on the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) of solid pancreatic masses. Am J Gastroenterol. 2011 Sep;106(9):1705-10. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2011.119. Epub 2011 Apr 12.
  • Iglesias-Garcia J, Poley JW, Larghi A, Giovannini M, Petrone MC, Abdulkader I, Monges G, Costamagna G, Arcidiacono P, Biermann K, Rindi G, Bories E, Dogloni C, Bruno M, Dominguez-Munoz JE. Feasibility and yield of a new EUS histology needle: results from a multicenter, pooled, cohort study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011 Jun;73(6):1189-96. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.01.053. Epub 2011 Mar 21.
  • Bang JY, Hebert-Magee S, Hasan MK, Navaneethan U, Hawes R, Varadarajulu S. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided biopsy using a Franseen needle design: Initial assessment. Dig Endosc. 2017 May;29(3):338-346. doi: 10.1111/den.12769. Epub 2016 Dec 20.