The objective of this paired cohort study is to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of Endoscopic Ultrasound-fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) with rapid onsite evaluation (ROSE) compared to EUS-fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) without ROSE. If EUS-FNB without ROSE is shown to be non-inferior to the current standard of care of EUS-FNA with ROSE in pancreatic lesions, this study has the potential to make EUS-guided tissue acquisition more economical (with elimination for the need for cytopathology staff onsite) as well as provide core histological specimen without sacrificing the overall diagnostic yield.
Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is the primary technique for tissue acquisition for pancreatic lesions. Despite widespread adoption of the techniques, the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA for pancreatic lesion is highly variable, with sensitivities ranging from 64-95%, specificities ranging from 75-100% and overall diagnostic accuracy ranging from 78-95%. Despite its mainstay as the primary technique for tissue acquisition, EUS-FNA has several limitations. The standard EUS-FNA does not routinely provide core biopsy specimen with preserved tissue architecture, which is required for immunohistochemical staining and for definitive diagnosis of conditions, such as lymphoma, gastrointestinal stromal tumors, Immunoglobulin G (IgG)-4-associated lymphoplasmacytic sclerosing pancreatitis. Furthermore, the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA is highly dependent on the availability of bedside cytotechnologist or cytopathologist for rapid onsite evaluation (ROSE), which increases the overall cost required to perform EUS-FNA. Recently, multiple dedicated EUS fine needle biopsy (FNB) needles have been developed to obtain core specimens. Early small studies have shown promising results with these EUS-FNB needles. The objective of this paired cohort study is to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNA with ROSE compared to EUS-FNA with ROSE. Participants will be assigned to the arms. If EUS-FNB without ROSE is shown to be non-inferior to the current standard of care of EUS-FNA with ROSE in pancreatic lesions, this study has the potential to make EUS-guided tissue acquisition more economical (with elimination for the need for cytopathology staff onsite) as well as provide core histological specimen without sacrificing the overall diagnostic yield.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Masking
DOUBLE
Enrollment
40
EUS-FNA with ROSE vs EUS-FNB without ROSE
EUS-FNA with ROSE vs EUS-FNB without ROSE
Johns Hopkins
Baltimore, Maryland, United States
The Diagnostic Accuracy of Fine-needle Biopsy (FNB) Sampling Without Rapid Onsite Evaluation (ROSE) and the Fine Needle Aspiration (FNA) With ROSE in Pancreatic Mass Lesions
Diagnostic accuracy will be defined as (true positive + true negative)/all participants in the arm.
Time frame: 6 months from the initial biopsy
Specimen Adequacy
Number of Specimens with Final Histopathological Diagnosis
Time frame: Post-procedure one week
Number of Histology Cores Obtained
Number of Samples with Visible Histology Core Biopsy
Time frame: Post-procedure one week
Median Number of Passes
Median number of passes required for accurate diagnosis
Time frame: 6 months from the initial biopsy
Number of Technical Failures
Technical failure was defined as the inability to perform the procedure, including the need to change the needle
Time frame: After the procedure, an average of 1 hour
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.