Clinical Trial Record

Return to Clinical Trials

Evaluating the Number of Passes Required for Diagnostic Cell Block During EUS-FNA of Solid Pancreatic Mass Lesions


2013-02


2014-01


2014-01


62

Study Overview

Evaluating the Number of Passes Required for Diagnostic Cell Block During EUS-FNA of Solid Pancreatic Mass Lesions

This study will test the amount of tissue, called ⋎ll block", obtained from your pancreas. Patients who are asked to participate in this study have a growth (mass) in the pancreas that needs a biopsy so a diagnosis can be made. Although we usually perform 2 to 4 passes (number of times the doctor biopsies the mass), at this time we do not know the ideal number of passes needed to obtain adequate amount of tissue for making a diagnosis. The purpose of this study is to compare the amount of tissue obtained with 2 passes versus 4 passes.

Primary Aim: To compare the number of passes required for obtaining adequate cell block material during EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic mass lesions. Primary Research Hypothesis: More specimen is required to obtain definitive diagnosis on cell block. This translates to less need for repeat procedures (due to nondiagnostic index procedure due to inadequate FNA passes), prompt treatment to patients and better use of health care resources. Therefore, we will be comparing 2 versus 4 FNA passes to determine which number of FNA pases will yield an adequate diagnostic cell block. Secondary Aims: To compare the rate of complications when performing 2 versus 4 EUS-FNA passes of solid pancreatic mass lesions. Secondary Research Hypothesis: EUS-guided FNA is a safe procedure with a complication rate of < 1%. By performing more (four) NA passes one is likely to yield a better quality cell block while at the same time without compromising patient safety.

  • Pancreatic Cancer
  • PROCEDURE: EUS FNA with 2 passes
  • PROCEDURE: EUS FNA with 4 passes
  • 407129

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

2013-02-26  

N/A  

2017-08-02  

2013-03-08  

N/A  

2017-08-03  

2013-03-12  

N/A  

2017-08  

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:
Single


Arms and Interventions

Participant Group/ArmIntervention/Treatment
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR: EUS FNA with 2 passes

biopsy with 2 passes of the needle

PROCEDURE: EUS FNA with 2 passes

  • biopsy with 2 passes
ACTIVE_COMPARATOR: EUS FNA with 4 passes

biopsy with 4 passes of the needle

PROCEDURE: EUS FNA with 4 passes

  • biopsy with 4 passes
Primary Outcome MeasuresMeasure DescriptionTime Frame
number of passesThe primary endpoint of the study is to compare the number of passes required to make definitive diagnosis on cell block. This will be assessed by amount (quantity) of the sample to make the diagnosis proportionate to which group the subject was randomized to (two passes versus four passes).up to 12 months
Secondary Outcome MeasuresMeasure DescriptionTime Frame

Contacts and Locations

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

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:
19 Years

Accepts Healthy Volunteers:

    Inclusion Criteria:
    1) All patients referred to Florida Hospital Endoscopy Unit for assessment of pancreatic mass lesions that require FNA.
    Exclusion Criteria:
    1. Age <19 years 2. Unable to safely undergo EUS for any reason 3. Coagulopathy (INR >1.6, Prothrombin Time >18secs, Thrombocytopenia <80,000 cells/ml) 4. Unable to consent 5. Non-English speaking patients. 6. Participation in any other Clinical Trial (excluding registries and databases)

Collaborators and Investigators

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

  • University of Alabama at Birmingham

  • PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR: Shyam Varadarajulu, MD, AdventHealth

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

  • Varadarajulu S, Bang JY, Holt BA, Hasan MK, Logue A, Hawes RH, Hebert-Magee S. The 25-gauge EUS-FNA needle: Good for on-site but poor for off-site evaluation? Results of a randomized trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014 Dec;80(6):1056-63. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.05.304. Epub 2014 Jun 25.