AzTrials
AzTrials

JaundiceNCT01514058

A Prospective, Randomized Study Evaluating the Effect of Biliary Stenting on EAU-FNA in Patients With Suspected Malignant Biliary Obstruction

A study testing EUS-FNA first, followed by CRCP with bilinary stenting and ERCP with stent placement, followed by EUS-FNA in people with Jaundice, run by Wake Forest University Health Sciences at 1 site in United States.

Terminated

Stopped early. The study ended before it was planned to and will not resume.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

Patients who present with obstructive jaundice due to a malignant stricture often undergo a battery of tests for diagnosis, treatment options, and prognosis. An endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is often performed with biliary stent placement for symptom relief as well as brushings for cytology. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Jaundice
What is being tested?
EUS-FNA first, followed by CRCP with bilinary stenting and ERCP with stent placement, followed by EUS-FNA
Type of treatment
Surgery or procedure
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
8 participants
Where
1 siteUnited States
Study dates
Nov 2011to Sep 2012
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Subjects must be able to review and sign informed consent.
  • Subjects must require biliary stenting for the relief of their symptoms as well as FNA biopsy for proper diagnosis.
  • Suspected mass should be located in the head, uncinate, or neck of the pancreas.

Who cannot join

  • Cannot give and sign informed consent.
  • The suspected mass is located in the body or tail of the pancreas.
  • The patient may be a candidate for palliative biliary stenting (in which a metal stent would be placed)

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United States1 site
  • Wake Forest Baptist Health

    Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 27157

Other trials in United States

About this study

Patients who present with obstructive jaundice due to a malignant stricture often undergo a battery of tests for diagnosis, treatment options, and prognosis. An endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is often performed with biliary stent placement for symptom relief as well as brushings for cytology. An endoscopic ultrasound is performed as well for fine needle aspiration (FNA) of the pancreas to aid in diagnosis. However, since EUS is not available at many centers, patients often undergo an initial ERCP procedure with stent placement (which is more widely available) prior to referral for EUS. It has been reported that biliary stents can disturb EUS visualization due to inflammation, acoustic shadowing, and pneumobilia which may lessen the accuracy of diagnosis.1 The cytological yield from the EUS with FNA procedure may also be compromised in patients with biliary stents. As such, diagnosis and treatment options may be delayed. One retrospective study of 65 subjects showed a significant difference in the number of correctly staged pancreatic head cancers (mainly T stage) in patients without stents versus those with biliary stents (85% vs 47%).2 A second retrospective study concluded that tissue diagnosis is not influenced in patients with stents placed greater than 24 hours before the EUS; however, patients with stents placed just prior to the EUS (less than 24 hours) were more likely to have indeterminate results.1 Although the findings are suggestive, the studies are limited by their retrospective design and these questions have not yet been addressed in a prospective study.

Both procedures require anesthesia, and when performed sequentially in the same setting, the duration of anesthesia is prolonged. This is concerning for the patient since complications may theoretically increase with prolonged anesthesia. However, a retrospective review at a tertiary referral center showed that combined EUS and ERCP yielded a complication rate no higher than that of the component procedures.3

Read more

At our institution, the current practice is to sequentially perform both EUS and ERCP in the same setting for patients with suspected malignant biliary obstruction. Typically, EUS-FNA is performed first, followed by ERCP.

Hypothesis We hypothesize that performing ERCP with biliary stenting immediately prior to EUS-FNA will decrease the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA and diminish the ability of EUS to accurately stage pancreas tumors. Conversely, performing EUS-FNA prior to ERCP will increase biliary cannulation time and increase success rate.

The objectives of this study are as follows:

  1. Determine the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA (for diagnosis of cancer vs benign process) when performed either immediately before or after ERCP with biliary stenting (primary outcome)
  2. Determine the ability of EUS to accurately stage pancreatic masses (T and N staging) when performed either immediately before or after ERCP with biliary stenting (secondary outcome) in comparison to the gold standard of surgical pathology post resection or in comparison to CT findings (in those patients who are not surgical candidates)
  3. Determine the biliary cannulation time (the time it takes to successfully pass a wire into the common bile duct from the start of the procedure) and success rate of placing a biliary stent during ERCP when performed either immediately before or after EUS-FNA (secondary outcome)
Conditions
Jaundice
Being tested
EUS-FNA first, followed by CRCP with bilinary stenting, ERCP with stent placement, followed by EUS-FNA
Medical subject headings
Jaundice

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • EUS-FNA first, followed by CRCP with bilinary stentingProcedure or surgery

    EUS-FNA first, followed by CRCP with bilinary stenting (using a plastic stent)

  • ERCP with stent placement, followed by EUS-FNAProcedure or surgery

    ERCP with stent placement, followed by EUS-FNA

Study groups in NCT01514058
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
EUS-FNA FirstActive comparatorPatients will undergo EUS-FNA first, followed by ERCP with biliary stenting (using a plastic stent).
Receives: Procedure: EUS-FNA first, followed by CRCP with bilinary stenting
ERCP with stent placement firstActive comparatorPatients will undergo ERCP with stent placement first, followed by EUS-FNA.
Receives: Procedure: ERCP with stent placement, followed by EUS-FNA

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Cytological yield (adequate versus inadequate for diagnosis) of EUS-FNA prior to stent placement vs post stent placement

    Cytological yield will be defined by the ability of the pathologist to render a diagnosis based on the material supplied to them during the procedure (adequate vs inadequate tissue to make a diagnosis of malignant vs benign disease).

    Measured: 1 day

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted20 Jan 2012 (estimated)
  2. Study startNov 2011
  3. Primary completionSep 2012
  4. Study completionSep 2012

Why it stopped: new clinical strategies have rendered the question posed by this study less relevant

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Diagnosis
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
8 participants (actual)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT01514058
Sponsor's protocol ID
IRB00018166
Other IDs
CCCWFU 01711
Status last verified
Aug 2018
First submitted
12 Jan 2012
Last updated
10 Aug 2018
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing EUS-FNA first, followed by CRCP with bilinary stenting and ERCP with stent placement, followed by EUS-FNA in people with Jaundice, run by Wake Forest University Health Sciences at 1 site in United States.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: stopped early, as of the sponsor's last update on 10 Aug 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

The study was stopped early (reason given: new clinical strategies have rendered the question posed by this study less relevant). Results are not available in the source record.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Cytological yield (adequate versus inadequate for diagnosis) of EUS-FNA prior to stent placement vs post stent placement (time frame: 1 day). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 10 Aug 2018.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in