Trial reportBMC gastroenterology2026
Comparison of 19-gauge aspiration needles versus 20-gauge forward-bevel needles for diagnosing autoimmune pancreatitis: a single-centre randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC gastroenterology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03753815 (A Randomized Trial Comparing a 19-gauge EUS Fine-needle Aspiration Device With a 20-gauge Fine-needle Biopsy Device for the Diagnosis of Autoimmune Pancreatitis), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
A Randomized Trial Comparing a 19-gauge EUS Fine-needle Aspiration Device With a 20-gauge Fine-needle Biopsy Device for the Diagnosis of Autoimmune Pancreatitis
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe diagnosis of autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is multidisciplinary. Pathological diagnosis is pivotal when distinguishing AIP from malignancies. In this study, we aim to compare the diagnostic performance and sample adequacy of 19-gauge endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) needles with 20-gauge endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) needles in patients with suspected AIP.
methodsWe conducted a single-centre, parallel-group, prospective, randomized controlled trial at Peking Union Medical College Hospital (Beijing, China). Patients with suspected AIP were enrolled between October 2018 and August 2023 and were randomly assigned to undergo tissue specimen collection using either a 19-gauge EUS-FNA needle or a 20-gauge EUS-FNB needle. The primary endpoint was the diagnostic accuracy against International Consensus Diagnostic Criteria, with secondary endpoints including histologic sensitivity, technical success rate, tissue adequacy, and adverse event rate.
results46 patients were enrolled and 45 underwent EUS (FNB n = 23, FNA n = 22), amongst 42 had a final diagnosis of AIP. Diagnostic accuracy, as the primary endpoint, was 52.2% (95% CI 33.0–70.8) with 20-G FNB versus 47.8% (95% CI 29.2–67.0) with 19-G FNA (P = 1.00). Sensitivity for histologic diagnosis of AIP was 47.6% (95% CI 28.3–67.6) in both groups (P = 1.00). Core tissue (≥ 500 μm) was obtained in 65.2% vs. 68.2% (P = 0.83). Adverse events were infrequent and similar (4.3%; both mild; P = 1.00).
conclusionsWe did not observe a statistically significant difference in diagnostic efficacy or core tissue acquisition between 19G FNA and 20G forward-bevelled FNB needles for patients with AIP; however, confidence intervals were wide and smaller clinically important differences could not be excluded. The 19-G FNA needle might serve as an alternative in centres where FNB needles are unavailable.
trial registrationThis study was retrospectively registered on 22 November 2018 at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03753815); first participant enrolled in October 2018.
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.