Duodenal Tumor, Esophageal Tumor, Gastric Tumor, Lymphadenopathy, Pancreatic Tumor
Conditions
Brief summary
The purpose of this study is to determine if fine needle aspiration or fine needle biopsy is more efficacious and cost-effective than the other while maintaining diagnostic accuracy in the setting of solid gastrointestinal lesions.
Detailed description
When ultrasound is used during endoscopy, we are able to visualize the structures adjacent to the gastrointestinal tract in close detail. Once the mass is visualized, we use endoscopic ultrasound to obtain a tissue sample, which the pathologist can examine in order to provide a diagnosis. The conventional method for obtaining a sample of tissue with endoscopic ultrasound is called fine needle aspiration (FNA). This involves the insertion of a thin needle into the mass and obtaining a small sample of tissue which the pathologist can examine. An alternative technique is called fine needle biopsy (FNB), and involves the insertion of a thin double-edged needle into the mass. This double-edged needle may potentially provide a larger sample of tissue to examine. Both of these techniques are commonly used, and both methods are equally safe. However, it is not known if one of these techniques is more effective at obtaining a sample of tissue or if one of these techniques is more cost-effective than the other. The purpose of this study is to determine if one method is more efficacious and cost-effective than the other while maintaining diagnostic accuracy. The results of this study may alter the way gastroenterologists obtain tissue samples during endoscopic ultrasound, improving the utility of the exam and reducing unnecessary healthcare costs.
Interventions
PROCEDUREEndoscopic ultrasound guided needle tissue acquisition.
Endoscopic ultrasound with fine needle aspiration (FNA) allows for the safe and efficacious sampling of solid lesions that are in close proximity to the gastrointestinal tract, including extraintestinal masses, subepithelial tumors, and peri-intestinal lymphadenopathy. Fine needle core biopsy (FNB) has the potential of accruing larger tissue samples during biopsies, which may make the procedure more efficacious. In our study, we are comparing the overall efficacy between these two needles which are currently both used as standard of care.
Sponsors
New York Medical College
Yale University
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
Columbia University
Weill Medical College of Cornell University
Stony Brook University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Consecutive adult patients who require endoscopic ultrasound and tissue sampling of either a) pancreatic solid lesion, b) subepithelial solid lesion of the esophagus, stomach, duodenum or rectum, c) liver lesion, or d) lymph nodes or mass lesion located adjacent to the esophagus, stomach, duodenum or rectum * Ability to give consent
Exclusion criteria
* Inability to obtain informed consent * Pregnant patients * Patients under the age of 18 * Severe cardiopulmonary disease preventing a safe EUS procedure * Patients unable to safely stop anti-coagulation therapy prior to EUS procedure
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Number of needle passes needed to obtain a pathologic diagnosis. | Within 1 week of study enrollment |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Frequency of adverse side effects. | Three months post-op |
| Diagnostic yield, defined as percentage of cases with a diagnostic biopsy sample, between FNA and FNB. | By three months post-op in the pathology report |
| Visible core specimens obtained and its correlation to obtaining a diagnostic sample. | During the intervention itself |
Countries
United States
Contacts
Primary ContactSatish Nagula, M.D.
Outcome results
None listed