Study Stopped
new clinical strategies have rendered the question posed by this study less relevant
A Prospective, Randomized Study Evaluating the Effect of Biliary Stenting on EAU-FNA in Patients With Suspected Malignant Biliary Obstruction
2 other identifiers
interventional
8
1 country
1
Brief Summary
Patients who present with obstructive jaundice due to a malignant stricture often undergo a battery of tests for diagnosis, treatment options, and prognosis. An endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is often performed with biliary stent placement for symptom relief as well as brushings for cytology. An endoscopic ultrasound is performed as well for fine needle aspiration (FNA) of the pancreas to aid in diagnosis. However, since EUS is not available at many centers, patients often undergo an initial ERCP procedure with stent placement (which is more widely available) prior to referral for EUS. It has been reported that biliary stents can disturb EUS visualization due to inflammation, acoustic shadowing, and pneumobilia which may lessen the accuracy of diagnosis.1 The cytological yield from the EUS with FNA procedure may also be compromised in patients with biliary stents. As such, diagnosis and treatment options may be delayed. One retrospective study of 65 subjects showed a significant difference in the number of correctly staged pancreatic head cancers (mainly T stage) in patients without stents versus those with biliary stents (85% vs 47%).2 A second retrospective study concluded that tissue diagnosis is not influenced in patients with stents placed greater than 24 hours before the EUS; however, patients with stents placed just prior to the EUS (less than 24 hours) were more likely to have indeterminate results.1 Although the findings are suggestive, the studies are limited by their retrospective design and these questions have not yet been addressed in a prospective study. Both procedures require anesthesia, and when performed sequentially in the same setting, the duration of anesthesia is prolonged. This is concerning for the patient since complications may theoretically increase with prolonged anesthesia. However, a retrospective review at a tertiary referral center showed that combined EUS and ERCP yielded a complication rate no higher than that of the component procedures.3 At our institution, the current practice is to sequentially perform both EUS and ERCP in the same setting for patients with suspected malignant biliary obstruction. Typically, EUS-FNA is performed first, followed by ERCP. Hypothesis We hypothesize that performing ERCP with biliary stenting immediately prior to EUS-FNA will decrease the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA and diminish the ability of EUS to accurately stage pancreas tumors. Conversely, performing EUS-FNA prior to ERCP will increase biliary cannulation time and increase success rate. The objectives of this study are as follows:
- 1.Determine the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA (for diagnosis of cancer vs benign process) when performed either immediately before or after ERCP with biliary stenting (primary outcome)
- 2.Determine the ability of EUS to accurately stage pancreatic masses (T and N staging) when performed either immediately before or after ERCP with biliary stenting (secondary outcome) in comparison to the gold standard of surgical pathology post resection or in comparison to CT findings (in those patients who are not surgical candidates)
- 3.Determine the biliary cannulation time (the time it takes to successfully pass a wire into the common bile duct from the start of the procedure) and success rate of placing a biliary stent during ERCP when performed either immediately before or after EUS-FNA (secondary outcome)
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at below P25 for not_applicable
Started Nov 2011
Shorter than P25 for not_applicable
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
November 1, 2011
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
January 12, 2012
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
January 20, 2012
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
September 1, 2012
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
September 1, 2012
CompletedAugust 10, 2018
August 1, 2018
10 months
January 12, 2012
August 8, 2018
Conditions
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Cytological yield (adequate versus inadequate for diagnosis) of EUS-FNA prior to stent placement vs post stent placement
Cytological yield will be defined by the ability of the pathologist to render a diagnosis based on the material supplied to them during the procedure (adequate vs inadequate tissue to make a diagnosis of malignant vs benign disease).
1 day
Study Arms (2)
EUS-FNA First
ACTIVE COMPARATORPatients will undergo EUS-FNA first, followed by ERCP with biliary stenting (using a plastic stent).
ERCP with stent placement first
ACTIVE COMPARATORPatients will undergo ERCP with stent placement first, followed by EUS-FNA.
Interventions
EUS-FNA first, followed by CRCP with bilinary stenting (using a plastic stent)
ERCP with stent placement, followed by EUS-FNA
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Subjects must be able to review and sign informed consent.
- Subjects must require biliary stenting for the relief of their symptoms as well as FNA biopsy for proper diagnosis.
- Suspected mass should be located in the head, uncinate, or neck of the pancreas.
You may not qualify if:
- Cannot give and sign informed consent.
- The suspected mass is located in the body or tail of the pancreas.
- The patient may be a candidate for palliative biliary stenting (in which a metal stent would be placed)
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Wake Forest Baptist Health
Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 27157, United States
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Interventions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
John A Evans, MD
Wake Forest University Health Sciences
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- NONE
- Purpose
- DIAGNOSTIC
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
January 12, 2012
First Posted
January 20, 2012
Study Start
November 1, 2011
Primary Completion
September 1, 2012
Study Completion
September 1, 2012
Last Updated
August 10, 2018
Record last verified: 2018-08