Comparison of Three Tissue Acquiring Techniques During EUS Guided Biopsies of Solid Tumors.

March 3, 2021 updated by: Antonio Mendoza-Ladd, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, El Paso

Comparison of Three Different Tissue Acquisition Techniques During Endoscopic Ultrasound-guide Fine Needle Biopsies of Solid Tumors: A Randomized Single Blind Clinical Trial.

The study's aim is to prospectively compare three different tissue acquisition techniques during EUS guided solid lesions biopsies.

Study Overview

Status

Terminated

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has been used since 1990's for the diagnosis and staging of esophageal, gastric, duodenal, pancreatobiliary, rectal mediastinal lesions and intra-abdominal lymphadenopathy. Studies have shown a variable range of specimen adequacy when performing pancreatic biopsies with the standard fine needle aspiration (FNA) needles with this modality. There are several factors that affect the overall diagnostic yield of this procedure, such as endosonographer experience, presence of cytopathologist during the procedure, the needle diameter and the number of passes. In this study we will compare the yield of recently available fine biopsy needles (FNB) using three different techniques to obtain samples from solid lesions. The three techniques to be compared in this study are: stylet slow pull (SP) vs dry suction (DS) vs wet suction (WS).

wall cells.

In the "suction technique" the stylet of the needle can be left in place or removed before puncturing the lesion. Once the needle is inside the target, negative pressure is applied through a 10 or 20 cc syringe connected to the needle.

The wet suction technique consists of flushing of the needle with 5 ml of saline solution to replace the column of air within the lumen of needle with saline solution before needle aspiration. Once the needle is flushed, negative pressure is applied with a 10 or 20 cc syringe connected to the needle.

In the slow pull technique, the stylet is left in place in the needle and is slightly retracted prior to puncturing the lesion. Once the needle is inside the target, the stylet is pushed completely into the needle to remove any contaminant cells and several back and forth movements are done while slowly withdrawing the stylet.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

55

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

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

Study Locations

    • Texas
      • El Paso, Texas, United States, 79905
        • Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center El Paso

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.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 80 years (ADULT, OLDER_ADULT)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. Ages between 18-80 years old
  2. Sex: male or female
  3. Patients who require EUS and tissue sampling of solid solid lesions (size >1 cm) anywhere in the following locations: lymph nodes, stomach, esophagus, colon, small intestine, pancreas, liver, spleen or kidney.
  4. Patients who are able to give consent

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Pregnant female
  2. Coagulation disorders (platelets < 50,000/mm3, INR > 2)
  3. Patients with acute pancreatitis in the immediate 2 weeks prior to the procedure.
  4. Cardiorespiratory dysfunction that precludes sedation.
  5. Unable to provide informed consent

Study Plan

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

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: DIAGNOSTIC
  • Allocation: RANDOMIZED
  • Interventional Model: PARALLEL
  • Masking: SINGLE

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
EXPERIMENTAL: Wet suction
This arm will include all the patients that will get an endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle biopsy done with the wet suction technique
Using the echoendoscope the lesion is identified and the needle is inserted in it to obtain a biopsy also under sonographic guidance
EXPERIMENTAL: Dry suction
This arm will include all the patients that will get and endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle biopsy done with the dry suction technique
Using the echoendoscope the lesion is identified and the needle is inserted in it to obtain a biopsy also under sonographic guidance
EXPERIMENTAL: Slow pull
This arm will include all the patients that will get an endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle biopsy done with the slow pull technique
Using the echoendoscope the lesion is identified and the needle is inserted in it to obtain a biopsy also under sonographic guidance

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Cellularity of Specimens Obtained by Each Individual Technique Based on Cellularity Score
Time Frame: 2 hours

0: inadequate

  1. limited cytological dx
  2. adquate cytological dx
  3. limited histological dx
  4. adequate histological dx with low quality
  5. adequate histological dx with high quality
2 hours

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Blood Contamination Score of Each Specimen Obtained
Time Frame: 2 hours

This is based on the following scale

  1. Blood present
  2. Blood clots present
2 hours
Number of Participants Stratified Per the Number of Diagnostic Passes Required
Time Frame: 2 hours
This indicates which out of the 3 passes provided enough tissue for diagnosis. If after 3 passes not enough tissue was obtained, the doctor was free to use the technique of his preference outside of the protocol.
2 hours

Collaborators and Investigators

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

Sponsor

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Antonio Mendoza Ladd, MD, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, El Paso

Publications and helpful links

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

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 Major Dates

Study Start (ACTUAL)

September 11, 2017

Primary Completion (ACTUAL)

October 1, 2020

Study Completion (ACTUAL)

October 1, 2020

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

August 23, 2017

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 24, 2017

First Posted (ACTUAL)

August 28, 2017

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (ACTUAL)

April 1, 2021

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

March 3, 2021

Last Verified

March 1, 2021

More Information

Terms related to this study

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

  • E17118

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

NO

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Solid Tumor

Clinical Trials on Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle biopsy

Search Similar Trials