Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy with or without macroscopic on-site evaluation: a randomized controlled noninferiority trial
- PMID: 36044915
- DOI: 10.1055/a-1915-5263
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy with or without macroscopic on-site evaluation: a randomized controlled noninferiority trial
Abstract
BACKGROUND : The advantage of using the macroscopic on-site evaluation (MOSE) technique during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) performed with 22G Franseen needles has not been investigated. We aimed to compare EUS-FNB with MOSE vs. EUS-FNB performed with three needle passes. METHODS : This randomized trial involved 10 Italian referral centers. Consecutive patients referred for EUS-FNB of pancreatic or nonpancreatic solid lesions were included in the study and randomized to the two groups. MOSE was performed by gross visualization of the collected material by the endoscopists and considered adequate when a white/yellowish aggregate core longer than 10 mm was retrieved. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy. Secondary outcomes were specimen adequacy, number of needle passes, and safety. RESULTS : 370 patients with 234 pancreatic lesions (63.2 %) and 136 nonpancreatic lesions (36.8 %) were randomized (190 EUS-FNB with MOSE and 180 with standard EUS-FNB). No statistically significant differences were found between EUS-FNB with MOSE and conventional EUS-FNB in terms of diagnostic accuracy (90.0 % [95 %CI 84.8 %-93.9 %] vs. 87.8 % [95 %CI 82.1 %-92.2 %]; P = 0.49), sample adequacy (93.1 % [95 %CI 88.6 %-96.3 %] vs. 95.5 % [95 %CI 91.4 %-98 %]; P = 0.31), and rate of adverse events (2.6 % vs. 1.1 %; P = 0.28). The median number of passes was significantly lower in the EUS-FNB with MOSE group (1 vs. 3; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS : The accuracy of EUS-FNB with MOSE is noninferior to that of EUS-FNB with three needle passes. MOSE reliably assesses sample adequacy and reduces the number of needle passes required to obtain the diagnosis with a 22G Franseen needle.
Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04486274.
Thieme. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Comment in
-
The role of macroscopic on-site evaluation in the era of biopsy needles: is it still useful?Endoscopy. 2023 Feb;55(2):138-139. doi: 10.1055/a-1942-6382. Epub 2022 Oct 10. Endoscopy. 2023. PMID: 36216265 No abstract available.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
