Multicenter, randomized comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of 19-gauge stainless steel and nitinol-based needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic masses

Background The use of 19-gauge (G) stainless steel needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of a pancreatic mass often results in technical difficulties due to an inability to advance the relatively rigid needle out of the endoscope. More flexible nitinol-based needles might decre...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:United European gastroenterology journal 2020-04, Vol.8 (3), p.314-320
Hauptverfasser: Hann, Alexander, Epp, Sonja, Veits, Lothar, Rosien, Ulrich, Siegel, Julian, Möschler, Oliver, Bohle, Wolfram, Meining, Alexander
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext bestellen
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 320
container_issue 3
container_start_page 314
container_title United European gastroenterology journal
container_volume 8
creator Hann, Alexander
Epp, Sonja
Veits, Lothar
Rosien, Ulrich
Siegel, Julian
Möschler, Oliver
Bohle, Wolfram
Meining, Alexander
description Background The use of 19-gauge (G) stainless steel needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of a pancreatic mass often results in technical difficulties due to an inability to advance the relatively rigid needle out of the endoscope. More flexible nitinol-based needles might decrease such technical difficulties and thus increase diagnostic accuracy. Objective In this prospective multicenter randomized single-blinded study we compared the diagnostic value of those two needle types in patients with a solid pancreatic lesion. Methods Patients with a solid pancreatic mass were diagnosed with endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy using one puncture with each needle in a randomized fashion. The primary endpoint was the diagnostic accuracy of each needle. Secondary endpoints included time for puncture, amount of tumour tissue obtained, and technical failure. Histological specimens were centrally reviewed by a pathologist blinded to the final needle type and final diagnosis (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02909530). Results Out of 46 prospectively recruited patients, central pathological examination was available for 41. Diagnostic accuracy for the two needles combined was 87.8%. Diagnostic accuracy was 66% and 68% using the stainless steel- and nitinol-based needle respectively. Time spent for puncturing was 137 ± 61 s (mean ± standard deviation) for the stainless steel and 111 ± 53 s for the nitinol-based needle (p = 0.037). Technical failure occurred in three (6.5%) cases using the stainless steel- and in none using the nitinol-based needle. Conclusions Usage of a nitinol-based 19-G needle failed to present a significant superior accuracy compared with a stainless steel needle in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/2050640619887580
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_24P</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7184661</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_2050640619887580</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2384202710</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4847-998f0bfcceb01d316ce3e8682d10f0c01f35bfbf2698f4c3087d8d4b2e08002a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFksFu1DAQhiMEolXpnRPykQMpYyebeC9IULUFqYgLPVuOPU5dJXbwJKDl8XiyOmxZARLCF4883_zza8ZF8ZzDGedt-1rABpoaGr6Vst1IeFQcr09lU_P68SGG5qg4JbqDfKSshaifFkeVELwCXh0XPz4uw-wNhhnTK5Z0sHH039EyE8dJJ08xsOjYfIvMet2HSJlm2pglabNbU3xb9nrpkdGsfRiQKEeIA8taLPjZhziUnaasGRBtBpiLiWHuRCZOWS07SJriEmzZL95m0PmA5Z5mnY8T_exEcfCWTTqYhHq1MWoipGfFE6cHwtOH-6S4ubz4fP6-vP509eH87XVpalm35XYrHXTOGOyA24o3BiuUjRSWgwMD3FWbznVONBmsTQWytdLWnUCQAEJXJ8Wbve60dCPadWZJD2pKftRpp6L26s9M8Leqj19Vy2XdNDwLvHwQSPHLgjSr0ZPBYdAB40JKVHk_IFoOGYU9alIkSugObTiodfvq7-3nkhe_2zsU_Np1BrZ74JsfcPdfQXVzcSXeXeZfs2lzbbmvJd2juotLCnnU_zZzDwOtzUI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2384202710</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Multicenter, randomized comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of 19-gauge stainless steel and nitinol-based needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic masses</title><source>Wiley Online Library Open Access</source><creator>Hann, Alexander ; Epp, Sonja ; Veits, Lothar ; Rosien, Ulrich ; Siegel, Julian ; Möschler, Oliver ; Bohle, Wolfram ; Meining, Alexander</creator><creatorcontrib>Hann, Alexander ; Epp, Sonja ; Veits, Lothar ; Rosien, Ulrich ; Siegel, Julian ; Möschler, Oliver ; Bohle, Wolfram ; Meining, Alexander</creatorcontrib><description>Background The use of 19-gauge (G) stainless steel needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of a pancreatic mass often results in technical difficulties due to an inability to advance the relatively rigid needle out of the endoscope. More flexible nitinol-based needles might decrease such technical difficulties and thus increase diagnostic accuracy. Objective In this prospective multicenter randomized single-blinded study we compared the diagnostic value of those two needle types in patients with a solid pancreatic lesion. Methods Patients with a solid pancreatic mass were diagnosed with endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy using one puncture with each needle in a randomized fashion. The primary endpoint was the diagnostic accuracy of each needle. Secondary endpoints included time for puncture, amount of tumour tissue obtained, and technical failure. Histological specimens were centrally reviewed by a pathologist blinded to the final needle type and final diagnosis (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02909530). Results Out of 46 prospectively recruited patients, central pathological examination was available for 41. Diagnostic accuracy for the two needles combined was 87.8%. Diagnostic accuracy was 66% and 68% using the stainless steel- and nitinol-based needle respectively. Time spent for puncturing was 137 ± 61 s (mean ± standard deviation) for the stainless steel and 111 ± 53 s for the nitinol-based needle (p = 0.037). Technical failure occurred in three (6.5%) cases using the stainless steel- and in none using the nitinol-based needle. Conclusions Usage of a nitinol-based 19-G needle failed to present a significant superior accuracy compared with a stainless steel needle in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2050-6406</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2050-6414</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/2050640619887580</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32213013</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Endoscopic ultrasound ; EUS‐FNB ; nitinol‐based needle ; Original ; pancreatic mass</subject><ispartof>United European gastroenterology journal, 2020-04, Vol.8 (3), p.314-320</ispartof><rights>Author(s) 2019</rights><rights>2020 The Authors. UEG Journal published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. on behalf of United European Gastroenterology</rights><rights>Author(s) 2019 2019 United European Gastroenterology</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4847-998f0bfcceb01d316ce3e8682d10f0c01f35bfbf2698f4c3087d8d4b2e08002a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4847-998f0bfcceb01d316ce3e8682d10f0c01f35bfbf2698f4c3087d8d4b2e08002a3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-8035-3559</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7184661/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7184661/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,725,778,782,883,1414,11545,27907,27908,45557,45558,46035,46459,53774,53776</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1177%2F2050640619887580$$EView_record_in_Wiley-Blackwell$$FView_record_in_$$GWiley-Blackwell</linktorsrc><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32213013$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hann, Alexander</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Epp, Sonja</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Veits, Lothar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rosien, Ulrich</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Siegel, Julian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Möschler, Oliver</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bohle, Wolfram</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meining, Alexander</creatorcontrib><title>Multicenter, randomized comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of 19-gauge stainless steel and nitinol-based needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic masses</title><title>United European gastroenterology journal</title><addtitle>United European Gastroenterol J</addtitle><description>Background The use of 19-gauge (G) stainless steel needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of a pancreatic mass often results in technical difficulties due to an inability to advance the relatively rigid needle out of the endoscope. More flexible nitinol-based needles might decrease such technical difficulties and thus increase diagnostic accuracy. Objective In this prospective multicenter randomized single-blinded study we compared the diagnostic value of those two needle types in patients with a solid pancreatic lesion. Methods Patients with a solid pancreatic mass were diagnosed with endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy using one puncture with each needle in a randomized fashion. The primary endpoint was the diagnostic accuracy of each needle. Secondary endpoints included time for puncture, amount of tumour tissue obtained, and technical failure. Histological specimens were centrally reviewed by a pathologist blinded to the final needle type and final diagnosis (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02909530). Results Out of 46 prospectively recruited patients, central pathological examination was available for 41. Diagnostic accuracy for the two needles combined was 87.8%. Diagnostic accuracy was 66% and 68% using the stainless steel- and nitinol-based needle respectively. Time spent for puncturing was 137 ± 61 s (mean ± standard deviation) for the stainless steel and 111 ± 53 s for the nitinol-based needle (p = 0.037). Technical failure occurred in three (6.5%) cases using the stainless steel- and in none using the nitinol-based needle. Conclusions Usage of a nitinol-based 19-G needle failed to present a significant superior accuracy compared with a stainless steel needle in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions.</description><subject>Endoscopic ultrasound</subject><subject>EUS‐FNB</subject><subject>nitinol‐based needle</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>pancreatic mass</subject><issn>2050-6406</issn><issn>2050-6414</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFksFu1DAQhiMEolXpnRPykQMpYyebeC9IULUFqYgLPVuOPU5dJXbwJKDl8XiyOmxZARLCF4883_zza8ZF8ZzDGedt-1rABpoaGr6Vst1IeFQcr09lU_P68SGG5qg4JbqDfKSshaifFkeVELwCXh0XPz4uw-wNhhnTK5Z0sHH039EyE8dJJ08xsOjYfIvMet2HSJlm2pglabNbU3xb9nrpkdGsfRiQKEeIA8taLPjZhziUnaasGRBtBpiLiWHuRCZOWS07SJriEmzZL95m0PmA5Z5mnY8T_exEcfCWTTqYhHq1MWoipGfFE6cHwtOH-6S4ubz4fP6-vP509eH87XVpalm35XYrHXTOGOyA24o3BiuUjRSWgwMD3FWbznVONBmsTQWytdLWnUCQAEJXJ8Wbve60dCPadWZJD2pKftRpp6L26s9M8Leqj19Vy2XdNDwLvHwQSPHLgjSr0ZPBYdAB40JKVHk_IFoOGYU9alIkSugObTiodfvq7-3nkhe_2zsU_Np1BrZ74JsfcPdfQXVzcSXeXeZfs2lzbbmvJd2juotLCnnU_zZzDwOtzUI</recordid><startdate>202004</startdate><enddate>202004</enddate><creator>Hann, Alexander</creator><creator>Epp, Sonja</creator><creator>Veits, Lothar</creator><creator>Rosien, Ulrich</creator><creator>Siegel, Julian</creator><creator>Möschler, Oliver</creator><creator>Bohle, Wolfram</creator><creator>Meining, Alexander</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8035-3559</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202004</creationdate><title>Multicenter, randomized comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of 19-gauge stainless steel and nitinol-based needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic masses</title><author>Hann, Alexander ; Epp, Sonja ; Veits, Lothar ; Rosien, Ulrich ; Siegel, Julian ; Möschler, Oliver ; Bohle, Wolfram ; Meining, Alexander</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4847-998f0bfcceb01d316ce3e8682d10f0c01f35bfbf2698f4c3087d8d4b2e08002a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Endoscopic ultrasound</topic><topic>EUS‐FNB</topic><topic>nitinol‐based needle</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>pancreatic mass</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hann, Alexander</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Epp, Sonja</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Veits, Lothar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rosien, Ulrich</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Siegel, Julian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Möschler, Oliver</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bohle, Wolfram</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meining, Alexander</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>United European gastroenterology journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hann, Alexander</au><au>Epp, Sonja</au><au>Veits, Lothar</au><au>Rosien, Ulrich</au><au>Siegel, Julian</au><au>Möschler, Oliver</au><au>Bohle, Wolfram</au><au>Meining, Alexander</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Multicenter, randomized comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of 19-gauge stainless steel and nitinol-based needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic masses</atitle><jtitle>United European gastroenterology journal</jtitle><addtitle>United European Gastroenterol J</addtitle><date>2020-04</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>8</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>314</spage><epage>320</epage><pages>314-320</pages><issn>2050-6406</issn><eissn>2050-6414</eissn><abstract>Background The use of 19-gauge (G) stainless steel needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of a pancreatic mass often results in technical difficulties due to an inability to advance the relatively rigid needle out of the endoscope. More flexible nitinol-based needles might decrease such technical difficulties and thus increase diagnostic accuracy. Objective In this prospective multicenter randomized single-blinded study we compared the diagnostic value of those two needle types in patients with a solid pancreatic lesion. Methods Patients with a solid pancreatic mass were diagnosed with endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy using one puncture with each needle in a randomized fashion. The primary endpoint was the diagnostic accuracy of each needle. Secondary endpoints included time for puncture, amount of tumour tissue obtained, and technical failure. Histological specimens were centrally reviewed by a pathologist blinded to the final needle type and final diagnosis (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02909530). Results Out of 46 prospectively recruited patients, central pathological examination was available for 41. Diagnostic accuracy for the two needles combined was 87.8%. Diagnostic accuracy was 66% and 68% using the stainless steel- and nitinol-based needle respectively. Time spent for puncturing was 137 ± 61 s (mean ± standard deviation) for the stainless steel and 111 ± 53 s for the nitinol-based needle (p = 0.037). Technical failure occurred in three (6.5%) cases using the stainless steel- and in none using the nitinol-based needle. Conclusions Usage of a nitinol-based 19-G needle failed to present a significant superior accuracy compared with a stainless steel needle in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>32213013</pmid><doi>10.1177/2050640619887580</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8035-3559</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext_linktorsrc
identifier ISSN: 2050-6406
ispartof United European gastroenterology journal, 2020-04, Vol.8 (3), p.314-320
issn 2050-6406
2050-6414
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7184661
source Wiley Online Library Open Access
subjects Endoscopic ultrasound
EUS‐FNB
nitinol‐based needle
Original
pancreatic mass
title Multicenter, randomized comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of 19-gauge stainless steel and nitinol-based needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic masses
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T22%3A09%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_24P&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Multicenter,%20randomized%20comparison%20of%20the%20diagnostic%20accuracy%20of%2019-gauge%20stainless%20steel%20and%20nitinol-based%20needles%20for%20endoscopic%20ultrasound-guided%20fine-needle%20biopsy%20of%20solid%20pancreatic%20masses&rft.jtitle=United%20European%20gastroenterology%20journal&rft.au=Hann,%20Alexander&rft.date=2020-04&rft.volume=8&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=314&rft.epage=320&rft.pages=314-320&rft.issn=2050-6406&rft.eissn=2050-6414&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/2050640619887580&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_24P%3E2384202710%3C/proquest_24P%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2384202710&rft_id=info:pmid/32213013&rft_sage_id=10.1177_2050640619887580&rfr_iscdi=true