NCT02181140

Brief Summary

The study is designed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of a new designed endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) Core biopsy aspiration needle in comparison to a conventional EUS aspiration needle in GI-tumors.

Trial Health

87
On Track

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
56

participants targeted

Target at P25-P50 for not_applicable

Timeline
Completed

Started Aug 2011

Longer than P75 for not_applicable

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
completed

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

August 1, 2011

Completed
1.9 years until next milestone

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

July 8, 2013

Completed
12 months until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

July 3, 2014

Completed
3 months until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

October 1, 2014

Completed
Same day until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

October 1, 2014

Completed
12 months until next milestone

Results Posted

Study results publicly available

September 16, 2015

Completed
Last Updated

June 18, 2019

Status Verified

April 1, 2019

Enrollment Period

3.2 years

First QC Date

July 8, 2013

Results QC Date

May 21, 2015

Last Update Submit

June 5, 2019

Conditions

Keywords

fine needle aspirationcore biopsyendoscopic ultrasoundspace occupying process mediastinal, perigastral, perihilarsuspect lymph nodes mediastinal, perigastral or perihilardiagnostic accuracy of EUS guided core biopsy

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Diagnostic Accuracy

    Diagnostic accuracy of Pro-core needle (22 G) will be compared to conventional fine needle aspiration (22 G). Therefore EUS-FNA with both needles is undertaken in a random order in each lesion. For Pro-core needle, a histological / cytological diagnosis and quality assessment will be made by pathologists.For Echotip aspiration needle, reference cytology evaluation is done by cytology experts. The histopathological diagnosis after surgery or the clinical follow up of at least one year after EUS FNA is current standard.

    up to 1 year

Secondary Outcomes (2)

  • EUS Pro Core FNA: Histology Samples

    day 0 and day 14

  • Complication Rates

    day 0 and day 14

Study Arms (1)

EUS guided FNA and fine needle punction

OTHER

punction of endosonographically identified space-occupying process with aspirating fine needle and pro core fine needle in a randomized order

Device: EUS guided FNA and fine needle punction

Interventions

punction of a suspect area by a EUS guided fine needle as well as pro core fine needle to evacuate histology and smear biologics

EUS guided FNA and fine needle punction

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years+
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersYes
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • clinical indication for endoscopic ultrasound diagnostics with fine needle biopsies
  • age greater than 18 years

You may not qualify if:

  • difficult or impossible approach to desired structures due to anatomy (postoperative anatomy, e.g.)
  • cystic lesion, e.g. cystic pancreas tumors
  • coagulopathy
  • severe general condition of the patient
  • other contraindications for endoscopical ultrasound aided fine needle punction

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf

Hamburg, 20246, Germany

Location

Related Publications (23)

  • Parikh P, Shiloach M, Cohen ME, Bilimoria KY, Ko CY, Hall BL, Pitt HA. Pancreatectomy risk calculator: an ACS-NSQIP resource. HPB (Oxford). 2010 Sep;12(7):488-97. doi: 10.1111/j.1477-2574.2010.00216.x.

    PMID: 20815858BACKGROUND
  • van der Gaag NA, Rauws EA, van Eijck CH, Bruno MJ, van der Harst E, Kubben FJ, Gerritsen JJ, Greve JW, Gerhards MF, de Hingh IH, Klinkenbijl JH, Nio CY, de Castro SM, Busch OR, van Gulik TM, Bossuyt PM, Gouma DJ. Preoperative biliary drainage for cancer of the head of the pancreas. N Engl J Med. 2010 Jan 14;362(2):129-37. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0903230.

    PMID: 20071702BACKGROUND
  • Moller K, Papanikolaou IS, Toermer T, Delicha EM, Sarbia M, Schenck U, Koch M, Al-Abadi H, Meining A, Schmidt H, Schulz HJ, Wiedenmann B, Rosch T. EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses: high yield of 2 passes with combined histologic-cytologic analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Jul;70(1):60-9. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.10.008. Epub 2009 Apr 25.

    PMID: 19394012BACKGROUND
  • Takahashi K, Yamao K, Okubo K, Sawaki A, Mizuno N, Ashida R, Koshikawa T, Ueyama Y, Kasugai K, Hase S, Kakumu S. Differential diagnosis of pancreatic cancer and focal pancreatitis by using EUS-guided FNA. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005 Jan;61(1):76-9. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(04)02224-2.

    PMID: 15672060BACKGROUND
  • Iglesias-Garcia J, Dominguez-Munoz E, Lozano-Leon A, Abdulkader I, Larino-Noia J, Antunez J, Forteza J. Impact of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy for diagnosis of pancreatic masses. World J Gastroenterol. 2007 Jan 14;13(2):289-93. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v13.i2.289.

    PMID: 17226911BACKGROUND
  • Sudhoff T, Hollerbach S, Wilhelms I, Willert J, Reiser M, Topalidis T, Schmiegel W, Graeven U. [Clinical utility of EUS-FNA in upper gastrointestinal and mediastinal disease]. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2004 Oct 15;129(42):2227-32. doi: 10.1055/s-2004-831867. German.

    PMID: 15483756BACKGROUND
  • Aithal GP, Anagnostopoulos GK, Tam W, Dean J, Zaitoun A, Kocjan G, Ragunath K, Pereira SP. EUS-guided tissue sampling: comparison of "dual sampling" (Trucut biopsy plus FNA) with "sequential sampling" (Trucut biopsy and then FNA as required). Endoscopy. 2007 Aug;39(8):725-30. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-966400. Epub 2007 Jul 10.

    PMID: 17620230BACKGROUND
  • Wittmann J, Kocjan G, Sgouros SN, Deheragoda M, Pereira SP. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue sampling by combined fine needle aspiration and trucut needle biopsy: a prospective study. Cytopathology. 2006 Feb;17(1):27-33. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2303.2006.00313.x.

    PMID: 16417562BACKGROUND
  • Shah SM, Ribeiro A, Levi J, Jorda M, Rocha-Lima C, Sleeman D, Hamilton-Nelson K, Ganjei-Azar P, Barkin J. EUS-guided fine needle aspiration with and without trucut biopsy of pancreatic masses. JOP. 2008 Jul 10;9(4):422-30.

    PMID: 18648133BACKGROUND
  • Storch I, Shah M, Thurer R, Donna E, Ribeiro A. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and Trucut biopsy in thoracic lesions: when tissue is the issue. Surg Endosc. 2008 Jan;22(1):86-90. doi: 10.1007/s00464-007-9374-x. Epub 2007 May 4.

    PMID: 17479313BACKGROUND
  • Storch I, Jorda M, Thurer R, Raez L, Rocha-Lima C, Vernon S, Ribeiro A. Advantage of EUS Trucut biopsy combined with fine-needle aspiration without immediate on-site cytopathologic examination. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006 Oct;64(4):505-11. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2006.02.056. Epub 2006 Jun 6.

    PMID: 16996340BACKGROUND
  • Saftoiu A, Vilmann P, Guldhammer Skov B, Georgescu CV. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided Trucut biopsy adds significant information to EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration in selected patients: a prospective study. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2007 Jan;42(1):117-25. doi: 10.1080/00365520600789800.

    PMID: 17190771BACKGROUND
  • Sakamoto H, Kitano M, Komaki T, Noda K, Chikugo T, Dote K, Takeyama Y, Das K, Yamao K, Kudo M. Prospective comparative study of the EUS guided 25-gauge FNA needle with the 19-gauge Trucut needle and 22-gauge FNA needle in patients with solid pancreatic masses. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009 Mar;24(3):384-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2008.05636.x. Epub 2008 Nov 20.

    PMID: 19032453BACKGROUND
  • Siddiqui UD, Rossi F, Rosenthal LS, Padda MS, Murali-Dharan V, Aslanian HR. EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses: a prospective, randomized trial comparing 22-gauge and 25-gauge needles. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Dec;70(6):1093-7. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2009.05.037. Epub 2009 Jul 28.

    PMID: 19640524BACKGROUND
  • Jenssen C, Faiss S, Nurnberg D. [Complications of endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic ultrasound-guided interventions - results of a survey among German centers]. Z Gastroenterol. 2008 Oct;46(10):1177-84. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1027334. Epub 2008 Oct 20. German.

    PMID: 18937186BACKGROUND
  • Bournet B, Migueres I, Delacroix M, Vigouroux D, Bornet JL, Escourrou J, Buscail L. Early morbidity of endoscopic ultrasound: 13 years' experience at a referral center. Endoscopy. 2006 Apr;38(4):349-54. doi: 10.1055/s-2005-921173.

    PMID: 16680633BACKGROUND
  • Mortensen MB, Fristrup C, Holm FS, Pless T, Durup J, Ainsworth AP, Nielsen HO, Hovendal C. Prospective evaluation of patient tolerability, satisfaction with patient information, and complications in endoscopic ultrasonography. Endoscopy. 2005 Feb;37(2):146-53. doi: 10.1055/s-2005-861142.

    PMID: 15692930BACKGROUND
  • Al-Haddad M, Wallace MB, Woodward TA, Gross SA, Hodgens CM, Toton RD, Raimondo M. The safety of fine-needle aspiration guided by endoscopic ultrasound: a prospective study. Endoscopy. 2008 Mar;40(3):204-8. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-995336. Epub 2007 Dec 4.

    PMID: 18058615BACKGROUND
  • Williams DB, Sahai AV, Aabakken L, Penman ID, van Velse A, Webb J, Wilson M, Hoffman BJ, Hawes RH. Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration biopsy: a large single centre experience. Gut. 1999 May;44(5):720-6. doi: 10.1136/gut.44.5.720.

    PMID: 10205212BACKGROUND
  • O'Toole D, Palazzo L, Arotcarena R, Dancour A, Aubert A, Hammel P, Amaris J, Ruszniewski P. Assessment of complications of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration. Gastrointest Endosc. 2001 Apr;53(4):470-4. doi: 10.1067/mge.2001.112839.

    PMID: 11275888BACKGROUND
  • Wiersema MJ, Vilmann P, Giovannini M, Chang KJ, Wiersema LM. Endosonography-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy: diagnostic accuracy and complication assessment. Gastroenterology. 1997 Apr;112(4):1087-95. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5085(97)70164-1.

    PMID: 9097990BACKGROUND
  • Buscarini E, De Angelis C, Arcidiacono PG, Rocca R, Lupinacci G, Manta R, Carucci P, Repici A, Carrara S, Vallisa D, Buscarini L, Cosentino F, Pera A, Rizzetto M, Testoni PA, Zambelli A. Multicentre retrospective study on endoscopic ultrasound complications. Dig Liver Dis. 2006 Oct;38(10):762-7. doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2006.06.005. Epub 2006 Jul 13.

    PMID: 16843076BACKGROUND
  • Sterlacci W, Sioulas AD, Veits L, Gonullu P, Schachschal G, Groth S, Anders M, Kontos CK, Topalidis T, Hinsch A, Vieth M, Rosch T, Denzer UW. 22-gauge core vs 22-gauge aspiration needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of abdominal masses. World J Gastroenterol. 2016 Oct 21;22(39):8820-8830. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i39.8820.

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Pancreatic Neoplasms

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Digestive System NeoplasmsNeoplasms by SiteNeoplasmsEndocrine Gland NeoplasmsDigestive System DiseasesPancreatic DiseasesEndocrine System Diseases

Results Point of Contact

Title
Professor Dr. Thomas Rösch
Organization
Interdisciplinary Endoscopy Department and Clinic University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf

Study Officials

  • Thomas Rösch, Prof. Dr.

    University Hospital Eppendorf, Hamburg

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Publication Agreements

PI is Sponsor Employee
No
Restrictive Agreement
No

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
NA
Masking
NONE
Purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Intervention Model
SINGLE GROUP
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
Medical Director, Interdisciplinary Endoscopy Department and Clinic

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

July 8, 2013

First Posted

July 3, 2014

Study Start

August 1, 2011

Primary Completion

October 1, 2014

Study Completion

October 1, 2014

Last Updated

June 18, 2019

Results First Posted

September 16, 2015

Record last verified: 2019-04

Locations