Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
N/A N=137 Single-blind Diagnostic

EUS-guided Fine Needle Aspiration (FNA) With and Without the Use of a Stylet

Biopsy, Fine-Needle · Biopsy, Fine-Needle/Methods · Endosonography

Enrolled (actual)
137
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Dec 2014
Primary outcome: Primary: Compare Adequacy of Diagnoses in Passes With and Without a Stylet — 80; 68; 21; 18 passes

Study Design & Population

Study type
Interventional
Phase
N/A
Interventions
FNA with and without a stylet (Device)
Age
Adult, Older Adult · 18+ yrs
Sex
All
Sponsor
Washington University School of Medicine
Primary completion
Jul 2011

Outcome Measures

OutcomeResultp-value
PRIMARY
Compare Adequacy of Diagnoses in Passes With and Without a Stylet
80; 68; 21; 18; 23; 15
SECONDARY
Degree of Cellularity
127; 120; 70; 82; 78; 73
SECONDARY
Degree of Cellularity
127; 120; 70; 82; 78; 73
SECONDARY
Adequacy of Specimen
87; 78; 188; 197
SECONDARY
Contamination
212; 220; 52; 47; 7; 5
SECONDARY
Amount of Blood
126; 120; 82; 86; 67; 69

Summary

The purpose of this study is to determine that there is no difference in final diagnosis of FNA specimens without a stylet, compared to using a stylet, when examined by a skilled cytopathologist.

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • patients referred to the Washington University Interventional Endoscopy Division for EUS-guided FNA of a solid lesion (e.g. pancreatic mass, gastric wall mass, or lymphadenopathy)

Exclusion Criteria

  • Patients <18 years of age
  • patients who cannot provide independent informed consent (i.e. patients with dementia or with a health care proxy)
  • pregnant women (as determined by pregnancy test given as part of standard of care)
  • prisoners
View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01316614). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.

Back to search