Skip to content

To compare the performance of different techniques of endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle biopsy of pancreatico biliary lesions

To compare the diagnostic performance of different suction techniques during EUS - FNB for pancreatico-biliary lesions - NIL

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Phase 2Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2025/02/080550
Enrollment
96
Registered
2025-02-13
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2025-03-03

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: K87- Disorders of gallbladder, biliarytract and pancreas in diseases classified elsewhere

Interventions

Intervention1: Endoscopic ultrasound guided Fine needle biopsy- Slow stylet pull technique: The biopsy needle will be flushed with 5 ml normal saline, if previous biopsy was already taken. The lesion

Sponsors

AIIMS Jodhpur
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1. Age more than 18 years 2. patients with pancreatic, peripancreatic and pancreaticobiliary solid lesions which requires EUS- FNB for diagnosis 3. Informed consent is obtained

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1. Age less than 18 years 2. Active gastrointestinal bleeding Bleeding tendency (platelet less than 50,000/mm3 and/or PT INR more than 1.5) 3. Pregnant patient 4. Unable to understand and/or read the informed consent.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Accuracy in diagnosing the lesions, compared with final diagnosis. Final diagnosis confirmed by three methods: the results of EUS-FNB, surgical pathology, if available, and clinical follow-up for at least 3 monthsTimepoint: At 3 months

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
1.Sensitivity of each technique 2.Specificity of each technique 3.Positive predictive value of each technique 4.Negative predictive value of each technique 5.Specimen quality of each technique as defined by the following: a. Tissue integrity b. Blood contamination c. Cellularity 6.Technical success rate of each technique 7.Rate of adverse events of each technique Timepoint: 3 months

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactTerence Susngi

AIIMS Jodhpur

tcsusngi1705@gmail.com9789320051

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026