NCT04841616

Brief Summary

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is an indispensable tool for tissue acquisition for pancreatic lesions. Fine needle aspiration (FNA) is once considered as the first line diagnostic method especially when rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) by cytopathologist is available. However, FNA alone has several limitations including inadequate acquisition of cells, and unable to provide core tissue for further histological analysis. Furthermore, ROSE is not available in many endoscopic centres due to limited resources. Endosonographers around the world, are discovering methods to overcome the limitations, including the use of new on-site evaluation technique by endoscopists, new fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles, contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS-guided FNB. In this study, the investigators propose to compare the diagnostic performance between contrast-enhanced EUS-guided FNB versus conventional EUS-guided FNB technique with an aim to define the best EUS-guided tissue acquisition technique in the absence of ROSE. Results obtained from this research is expected to have significant impact in providing new insights on the best EUS-guided tissue acquisition method. It may replace FNA with ROSE as the gold standard for EUS-guided tissue acquisition in an affordable manner. It will also save the patients from unnecessary procedures and fasten the treatment pathways.

Trial Health

43
At Risk

Trial Health Score

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

Trial has exceeded expected completion date
Enrollment
128

participants targeted

Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable

Timeline
Completed

Started Jul 2021

Longer than P75 for not_applicable

Geographic Reach
1 country

1 active site

Status
unknown

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

First Submitted

Initial submission to the registry

March 30, 2021

Completed
13 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

April 12, 2021

Completed
3 months until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

July 1, 2021

Completed
3 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

June 30, 2024

Completed
1 year until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

June 30, 2025

Completed
Last Updated

February 13, 2023

Status Verified

February 1, 2023

Enrollment Period

3 years

First QC Date

March 30, 2021

Last Update Submit

February 9, 2023

Conditions

Keywords

Contrast-Enhanced EUSFNBSolid Pancreatic Lesions

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • False negative rate

    up to 6 months

Secondary Outcomes (5)

  • sensitivity

    up to 6 months

  • specificity

    up to 6 months

  • procedural time

    within 1 day

  • procedure-related complications

    up to 6 months

  • the need to repeat procedure

    up to 6 months

Study Arms (2)

Contrast-enhanced EUS (CH-EUS) Arm

EXPERIMENTAL

After initial evaluation, 2.5ml of second-generation contrast media, SonoVue (Bracco, Ceriano Laghetto, Italy), will be injected. After infusion, the point of puncture will be determined when the parenchyma of the pancreas was enhanced. The contrast-enhanced area was identified and then the biopsy was directed toward that area, while avoiding unenhanced (i.e. necrotic) areas and not changing the target lesion. Rest of the procedure is identical with that in conventional EUS arm.

Procedure: Contrast-Enhanced Harmonic Endoscopic Ultrasound

Conventional EUS Arm

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Patients will undergo EUS FNB with the 22-gauge FNB needle (Acquire®, Boston Scientific Natick, MA). After each pass, the needle is removed and the stylet will be introduced into the needle to extrude any aspirated material on a glass slide for inspection of the presence of a macroscopic visible core (MVC). The total length of the MVC will be measured before placement into a formalin bottle. EUS-FNB is completed if the obtained MVC is longer than 4mm and deemed adequate by endoscopist. If the obtained MVC is \< 4mm, the procedure is repeated until a MVC of ≥ 4mm is obtained and deemed adequate by endoscopist. A maximum of 7 passes is allowed

Procedure: Endoscopic Ultrasound -Guided Fine Needle Biopsy

Interventions

Patients will undergo EUS FNB with the 22-gauge FNB needle (Acquire®, Boston Scientific Natick, MA). After each pass, the needle is removed and the stylet will be introduced into the needle to extrude any aspirated material on a glass slide for inspection of the presence of a macroscopic visible core (MVC). The total length of the MVC will be measured before placement into a formalin bottle. EUS-FNB is completed if the obtained MVC is longer than 4mm and deemed adequate by endoscopist. If the obtained MVC is \< 4mm, the procedure is repeated until a MVC of ≥ 4mm is obtained and deemed adequate by endoscopist. A maximum of 7 passes is allowed.

Conventional EUS Arm

After initial evaluation, 2.5ml of second-generation contrast media, SonoVueTM (Bracco, Ceriano Laghetto, Italy), will be injected. After infusion, the point of puncture will be determined when the parenchyma of the pancreas was enhanced. The contrast-enhanced area was identified and then the biopsy was directed toward that area, while avoiding unenhanced (i.e. necrotic) areas and not changing the target lesion. Rest of the procedure is identical with that in conventional EUS arm.

Contrast-enhanced EUS (CH-EUS) Arm

Eligibility Criteria

Age18 Years - 80 Years
Sexall
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • referred for EUS-guided tissue acquisition for solid pancreatic lesions greater than 1cm in the largest diameter.

You may not qualify if:

  • with coagulopathy, altered anatomy, contraindications for conscious sedation, pregnancy
  • who cannot provide informed consent.

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (1)

Department of Surgery; The Chinese University of Hong Kong

Hong Kong, Hong Kong

RECRUITING

Related Publications (15)

  • Strand DS, Jeffus SK, Sauer BG, Wang AY, Stelow EB, Shami VM. EUS-guided 22-gauge fine-needle aspiration versus core biopsy needle in the evaluation of solid pancreatic neoplasms. Diagn Cytopathol. 2014 Sep;42(9):751-8. doi: 10.1002/dc.23116. Epub 2014 Feb 18.

    PMID: 24550162BACKGROUND
  • Aadam AA, Wani S, Amick A, Shah JN, Bhat YM, Hamerski CM, Klapman JB, Muthusamy VR, Watson RR, Rademaker AW, Keswani RN, Keefer L, Das A, Komanduri S. A randomized controlled cross-over trial and cost analysis comparing endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration and fine needle biopsy. Endosc Int Open. 2016 May;4(5):E497-505. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-106958.

    PMID: 27227104BACKGROUND
  • Lee YN, Moon JH, Kim HK, Choi HJ, Choi MH, Kim DC, Lee TH, Cha SW, Cho YD, Park SH. Core biopsy needle versus standard aspiration needle for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a randomized parallel-group study. Endoscopy. 2014 Dec;46(12):1056-62. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1377558. Epub 2014 Aug 6.

    PMID: 25098611BACKGROUND
  • Iwashita T, Yasuda I, Mukai T, Doi S, Nakashima M, Uemura S, Mabuchi M, Shimizu M, Hatano Y, Hara A, Moriwaki H. Macroscopic on-site quality evaluation of biopsy specimens to improve the diagnostic accuracy during EUS-guided FNA using a 19-gauge needle for solid lesions: a single-center prospective pilot study (MOSE study). Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Jan;81(1):177-85. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.08.040. Epub 2014 Oct 29.

    PMID: 25440688BACKGROUND
  • Seicean A, Badea R, Moldovan-Pop A, Vultur S, Botan EC, Zaharie T, Saftoiu A, Mocan T, Iancu C, Graur F, Sparchez Z, Seicean R. Harmonic Contrast-Enhanced Endoscopic Ultrasonography for the Guidance of Fine-Needle Aspiration in Solid Pancreatic Masses. Ultraschall Med. 2017 Apr;38(2):174-182. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1553496. Epub 2015 Aug 14.

    PMID: 26274382BACKGROUND
  • Fuccio L, Larghi A. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration: How to obtain a core biopsy? Endosc Ultrasound. 2014 Apr;3(2):71-81. doi: 10.4103/2303-9027.123011.

    PMID: 24955336BACKGROUND
  • 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.

    PMID: 21420083BACKGROUND
  • Yang MJ, Yim H, Hwang JC, Lee D, Kim YB, Lim SG, Kim SS, Kang JK, Yoo BM, Kim JH. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses: 22-gauge aspiration versus 25-gauge biopsy needles. BMC Gastroenterol. 2015 Sep 29;15:122. doi: 10.1186/s12876-015-0352-9.

    PMID: 26419845BACKGROUND
  • Kin T, Katanuma A, Yane K, Takahashi K, Osanai M, Takaki R, Matsumoto K, Gon K, Matsumori T, Tomonari A, Maguchi H, Shinohara T, Nojima M. Diagnostic ability of EUS-FNA for pancreatic solid lesions with conventional 22-gauge needle using the slow pull technique: a prospective study. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2015 Jul;50(7):900-7. doi: 10.3109/00365521.2014.983155. Epub 2015 Mar 2.

    PMID: 25732902BACKGROUND
  • Teoh AYB, Serna C, Penas I, Chong CCN, Perez-Miranda M, Ng EKW, Lau JYW. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage reduces adverse events compared with percutaneous cholecystostomy in patients who are unfit for cholecystectomy. Endoscopy. 2017 Feb;49(2):130-138. doi: 10.1055/s-0042-119036. Epub 2016 Nov 22.

    PMID: 27875855BACKGROUND
  • Teoh AY, Ng EK, Chan SM, Lai M, Moran S, Binmoeller KF, Moon JH, Ho KY. Ex vivo comparison of the lumen-apposing properties of EUS-specific stents (with video). Gastrointest Endosc. 2016 Jul;84(1):62-8. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.11.041. Epub 2015 Dec 10.

    PMID: 26684601BACKGROUND
  • Teoh AYB, Chong CCN, Leung WW, Chan SKC, Tse YK, Ng EKW, Lai PBS, Wu JCY, Lau JYW. Electroacupuncture-reduced sedative and analgesic requirements for diagnostic EUS: a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, sham-controlled study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2018 Feb;87(2):476-485. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2017.07.029. Epub 2017 Jul 24.

    PMID: 28750840BACKGROUND
  • Chong CCN, Tang RSY, Wong JCT, Chan AWH, Teoh AYB. Endoscopic ultrasound of pancreatic lesions. J Vis Surg. 2016 Jul 22;2:119. doi: 10.21037/jovs.2016.07.10. eCollection 2016.

    PMID: 29399505BACKGROUND
  • Teoh AY, Chong CC, Chan AW, Lau JY. EUS-guided alcohol injection of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Jul;82(1):167. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.01.047. Epub 2015 Apr 22. No abstract available.

    PMID: 25910658BACKGROUND
  • Chong CCN, Teoh AYB, Tang RSY, Chan AWH, Ng EKW, Lai PBS. EUS-FNA using 22G nitinol or ProCore needles without on-site cytopathology. Endosc Ultrasound. 2018 Jan-Feb;7(1):56-60. doi: 10.4103/eus.eus_113_17.

    PMID: 29451170BACKGROUND

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Pancreatic Neoplasms

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

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

Study Officials

  • Ching Ning Chong

    CUHK

    PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Central Study Contacts

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
not applicable
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Masking
NONE
Purpose
TREATMENT
Intervention Model
PARALLEL
Sponsor Type
OTHER
Responsible Party
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
PI Title
Dr

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

March 30, 2021

First Posted

April 12, 2021

Study Start

July 1, 2021

Primary Completion

June 30, 2024

Study Completion

June 30, 2025

Last Updated

February 13, 2023

Record last verified: 2023-02

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will not share

Locations