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.
Similar articles
-
Cutting edge of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for solid pancreatic lesions.J Med Ultrason (2001). 2024 Apr;51(2):209-217. doi: 10.1007/s10396-023-01375-y. Epub 2023 Nov 1. J Med Ultrason (2001). 2024. PMID: 37914883 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Dry suction versus wet suction technique of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy for diagnosis of solid pancreatic lesions: study protocol of a multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiority trial.Trials. 2023 Dec 13;24(1):805. doi: 10.1186/s13063-023-07842-8. Trials. 2023. PMID: 38093381 Free PMC article.
-
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy using macroscopic on-site evaluation technique reduces the number passes yet maintains a high diagnostic accuracy: A randomized study.J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2024 Dec;39(12):2625-2630. doi: 10.1111/jgh.16744. Epub 2024 Sep 17. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2024. PMID: 39288986 Clinical Trial.
-
Touch imprint cytology on endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle biopsy provides comparable sample quality and diagnostic yield to standard endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration specimens in the evaluation of solid pancreatic lesions.Cytopathology. 2019 Mar;30(2):179-186. doi: 10.1111/cyt.12662. Epub 2018 Dec 21. Cytopathology. 2019. PMID: 30484917
-
Comparison of fine-needle aspiration and fine-needle biopsy devices for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid lesions: a systemic review and meta-analysis.Endoscopy. 2021 Apr;53(4):411-423. doi: 10.1055/a-1206-5552. Epub 2020 Aug 6. Endoscopy. 2021. PMID: 32583392
Cited by
-
Cutting edge of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for solid pancreatic lesions.J Med Ultrason (2001). 2024 Apr;51(2):209-217. doi: 10.1007/s10396-023-01375-y. Epub 2023 Nov 1. J Med Ultrason (2001). 2024. PMID: 37914883 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Contrast Enhanced EUS for Predicting Solid Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor Grade and Aggressiveness.Diagnostics (Basel). 2023 Jan 9;13(2):239. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13020239. Diagnostics (Basel). 2023. PMID: 36673049 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Oil blotting paper for formalin fixation increases endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition-collected sample volumes on glass slides.Cancer Med. 2024 May;13(9):e7189. doi: 10.1002/cam4.7189. Cancer Med. 2024. PMID: 38706442 Free PMC article.
-
Comparative Assessment of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biopsies vs. Percutaneous Biopsies of Pancreatic Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Performance.J Clin Med. 2024 May 25;13(11):3108. doi: 10.3390/jcm13113108. J Clin Med. 2024. PMID: 38892819 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Impact of tumor type and size on macroscopic tissue core retrieval in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy for pancreatic malignancies.BMC Gastroenterol. 2024 Nov 19;24(1):415. doi: 10.1186/s12876-024-03517-z. BMC Gastroenterol. 2024. PMID: 39563255 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical