ArticleiGIE : innovation, investigation and insights2023
Pilot study comparing a novel EUS-guided motorized biopsy needle technique with traditional sampling.
Article in iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application of a novel endoscopic ultrasound-guided motorized fine needle for liver and pancreatic lesion biopsy.VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2026Article
- Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Diagnosis of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Improving tissue acquisition in core samples using EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy sampling (EUS-FNB) for histologic diagnosis and tumor molecular profiling is needed for the era of precision medicine. However, sample quality is impacted by needle type, number of throws, and technique. Currently, all commercially available biopsy needles are manually operated. This pilot study is the first to compare Precision (Limaca Medical, Ein HaEmek, Israel), a new motorized EUS-FNB device programmed to drive controlled axial tissue cutting and synchronized high-speed rotational coring to optimize tissue acquisition and physician control, with SharkCore (Medtronic Corp., Minneapolis, MN) using a traditional manual technique. Methods: Patients with solid pancreas tumors were eligible for enrollment. Each patient's target lesion was sampled by both Precision and SharkCore. Procedure measures were number of passes and throws, diagnostic yield, and histologic scores. Results: Nine patients were enrolled. The average tissue sampling time using Precision was 3.87 minutes compared with 5.64 minutes with SharkCore ( Conclusions: EUS-FNB is the method of choice for tumor data acquisition. The initial results of this pilot study suggest an automated motorized needle biopsy sampling approach may lead to more consistent histologic quality along with the ability for molecular profiling of tumors with fewer throws and passes reducing average procedure time. Future larger studies are needed to validate these findings.
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.