Trial reportTrials2016
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.
Trial report in Trials, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Prospective Multi-center, Single Blinded, Randomized, Controlled Trial of EUS-FNB（Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Fine Needle Biopsy ） and EUS-FNA（Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Fine Needle Aspiration ） on Solid Occupying Lesion
Capillarity Versus Wet Technique. Comparison Between Two Methods of Tissue Acquisition Guided by Endoscopic Ultrasound.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Biopsy with Stylet and Suction Versus No Stylet No Suction for the Diagnosis of Pancreatic and Non-Pancreatic Lesions.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) from peritoneal lesions: a prospective cohort pilot study.BMC gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Tissue acquisition and pancreatic masses: Which needle and which acquisition technique should be used?Endoscopy international open · 2020Review
- Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and the management of pancreatic cancer.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2020Review
- Lung cancer biopsies: Comparison between simple 22G, 22G upgraded and 21G needle for EBUS-TBNA.Journal of Cancer · 2020Article
- Article
- Esophagus lyomyoma diagnosed with convex endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS).Respiratory medicine case reports · 2018Article
- Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration Vs Fine-Needle Biopsy.Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2017Article
- Novel biomarkers and endoscopic techniques for diagnosing pancreaticobiliary malignancy.F1000Research · 2017Review
- Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLinear 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/
designA 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 registrationClinical Trials.gov, NCT02327065 .
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.