Cargando…

Comparing endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) versus fine needle biopsy (FNB) in the diagnosis of solid lesions: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Linear endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) allows the visualization, identification, and characterization of the extent of lesions of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract and adjacent structures. EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) facilitates a more accurate diagnosis of mediastinal, in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Jinlin, Wu, Xiaoli, Yin, Ping, Guo, Qiaozhen, Hou, Wei, Li, Yawen, Wang, Yun, Cheng, Bin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4830051/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27071386
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1316-2
_version_ 1782426848658980864
author Wang, Jinlin
Wu, Xiaoli
Yin, Ping
Guo, Qiaozhen
Hou, Wei
Li, Yawen
Wang, Yun
Cheng, Bin
author_facet Wang, Jinlin
Wu, Xiaoli
Yin, Ping
Guo, Qiaozhen
Hou, Wei
Li, Yawen
Wang, Yun
Cheng, Bin
author_sort Wang, Jinlin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Linear endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) allows the visualization, identification, and characterization of the extent of lesions of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract and adjacent structures. EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) facilitates a more accurate diagnosis of mediastinal, intra-abdominal, and pancreatic lesions through the collection of the cytological material under direct visualization. Recent reports suggest that histological samples can be obtained by EUS-FNA with a reverse, bevel-tipped needle (the ProCore needle) to collect the core samples (fine needle biopsy, FNB), thereby adding a new dimension to the diagnostic usefulness of this technique. Certain neoplasms, such as lymphoma and stromal tumors, can be assessed by EUS-FNB to confirm the diagnosis. Here, we aimed to carry out a prospective, multicenter, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial to compare EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA. METHODS/DESIGN: A total of 408 patients will be enrolled from five endoscopic centers. Patients will be divided into two groups: (1) group A, which is the EUS regular needle group (EUS-FNA) and (2) group B, which is the EUS ProCore needle group (EUS-FNB). Patients in group A will be examined with a 22G EchoTip Ultra needle, and patients in group B, with a 22G EchoTip ProCore needle. For all included patients, four EUS-guided passes will be made in each lesion. In the first and second pass, a slow-pull suction method of the stylet will be done. The third and fourth pass will use manual suction of 5 cc. The primary objective is to compare the diagnostic yield of malignancy by EUS-FNA versus EUS-FNB. DISCUSSION: The trial will compare samples obtained by EUS-FNA versus EUS-FNB for the diagnostic yield of solid lesions. The efficacy of these two sampling methods will be assessed on various lesions, which may provide insights into developing practice guidelines for their future indications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov, NCT02327065.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4830051
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48300512016-04-14 Comparing endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) versus fine needle biopsy (FNB) in the diagnosis of solid lesions: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial Wang, Jinlin Wu, Xiaoli Yin, Ping Guo, Qiaozhen Hou, Wei Li, Yawen Wang, Yun Cheng, Bin Trials Study Protocol BACKGROUND: Linear endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) allows the visualization, identification, and characterization of the extent of lesions of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract and adjacent structures. EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) facilitates a more accurate diagnosis of mediastinal, intra-abdominal, and pancreatic lesions through the collection of the cytological material under direct visualization. Recent reports suggest that histological samples can be obtained by EUS-FNA with a reverse, bevel-tipped needle (the ProCore needle) to collect the core samples (fine needle biopsy, FNB), thereby adding a new dimension to the diagnostic usefulness of this technique. Certain neoplasms, such as lymphoma and stromal tumors, can be assessed by EUS-FNB to confirm the diagnosis. Here, we aimed to carry out a prospective, multicenter, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial to compare EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA. METHODS/DESIGN: A total of 408 patients will be enrolled from five endoscopic centers. Patients will be divided into two groups: (1) group A, which is the EUS regular needle group (EUS-FNA) and (2) group B, which is the EUS ProCore needle group (EUS-FNB). Patients in group A will be examined with a 22G EchoTip Ultra needle, and patients in group B, with a 22G EchoTip ProCore needle. For all included patients, four EUS-guided passes will be made in each lesion. In the first and second pass, a slow-pull suction method of the stylet will be done. The third and fourth pass will use manual suction of 5 cc. The primary objective is to compare the diagnostic yield of malignancy by EUS-FNA versus EUS-FNB. DISCUSSION: The trial will compare samples obtained by EUS-FNA versus EUS-FNB for the diagnostic yield of solid lesions. The efficacy of these two sampling methods will be assessed on various lesions, which may provide insights into developing practice guidelines for their future indications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov, NCT02327065. BioMed Central 2016-04-12 /pmc/articles/PMC4830051/ /pubmed/27071386 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1316-2 Text en © Wang et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Study Protocol
Wang, Jinlin
Wu, Xiaoli
Yin, Ping
Guo, Qiaozhen
Hou, Wei
Li, Yawen
Wang, Yun
Cheng, Bin
Comparing endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) versus fine needle biopsy (FNB) in the diagnosis of solid lesions: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title Comparing endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) versus fine needle biopsy (FNB) in the diagnosis of solid lesions: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_full Comparing endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) versus fine needle biopsy (FNB) in the diagnosis of solid lesions: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Comparing endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) versus fine needle biopsy (FNB) in the diagnosis of solid lesions: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Comparing endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) versus fine needle biopsy (FNB) in the diagnosis of solid lesions: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_short Comparing endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) versus fine needle biopsy (FNB) in the diagnosis of solid lesions: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
title_sort comparing endoscopic ultrasound (eus)-guided fine needle aspiration (fna) versus fine needle biopsy (fnb) in the diagnosis of solid lesions: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
topic Study Protocol
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4830051/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27071386
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13063-016-1316-2
work_keys_str_mv AT wangjinlin comparingendoscopicultrasoundeusguidedfineneedleaspirationfnaversusfineneedlebiopsyfnbinthediagnosisofsolidlesionsstudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT wuxiaoli comparingendoscopicultrasoundeusguidedfineneedleaspirationfnaversusfineneedlebiopsyfnbinthediagnosisofsolidlesionsstudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT yinping comparingendoscopicultrasoundeusguidedfineneedleaspirationfnaversusfineneedlebiopsyfnbinthediagnosisofsolidlesionsstudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT guoqiaozhen comparingendoscopicultrasoundeusguidedfineneedleaspirationfnaversusfineneedlebiopsyfnbinthediagnosisofsolidlesionsstudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT houwei comparingendoscopicultrasoundeusguidedfineneedleaspirationfnaversusfineneedlebiopsyfnbinthediagnosisofsolidlesionsstudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT liyawen comparingendoscopicultrasoundeusguidedfineneedleaspirationfnaversusfineneedlebiopsyfnbinthediagnosisofsolidlesionsstudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT wangyun comparingendoscopicultrasoundeusguidedfineneedleaspirationfnaversusfineneedlebiopsyfnbinthediagnosisofsolidlesionsstudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT chengbin comparingendoscopicultrasoundeusguidedfineneedleaspirationfnaversusfineneedlebiopsyfnbinthediagnosisofsolidlesionsstudyprotocolforarandomizedcontrolledtrial