Diagnoses DiseasesEUSLB1922NCT02967991
19 Versus 22-Gauge Needle for EUS-LB
A study testing EUS-guided liver biopsy in people with Diagnoses Diseases and Ultrasound Therapy; Complications, run by Geisinger Clinic at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Chronic liver disorders (CLD) are a major cause of morbidity and mortality for individuals in the US. Though serologic analysis will often lead to a conclusive diagnosis, liver biopsy remains an important method for helping to determine the etiology and stage of LD. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Diagnoses Diseases, Ultrasound Therapy; Complications, Liver Diseases
- What is being tested?
- EUS-guided liver biopsy
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 20 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Aug 2016to Jul 2017
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
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
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Patients undergoing EUS-LB
- Platelet count > 50,000
- International normalized ratio (INR) < 1.5
- Age > 18 years
- Non-pregnant patients
Who cannot join
- Age < 18 years
- Pregnant Patients
- Inability to obtain consent
- Anticoagulants or anti-platelet agents use (excluding aspirin) within the last 7-10 days
- Platelet count < 50,000
- INR > 1.5
- Presence of ascites
- Known liver cirrhosis
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Geisinger Medical Center
Danville, Pennsylvania, 17822
About this study
Official title: 19 Versus 22-Gauge Fine Needle Biopsy (FNB) Needles for Endoscopic Ultrasound Guided Liver Biopsy (EUS-LB): A Prospective Pilot Study
Chronic liver disorders (CLD) are a major cause of morbidity and mortality for individuals in the US. Though serologic analysis will often lead to a conclusive diagnosis, liver biopsy remains an important method for helping to determine the etiology and stage of LD. Percutaneous liver biopsy (PLB), transjugular liver biopsy (TLB) and surgical liver biopsy (SLB) are alternative methods for obtaining hepatic tissue. In recent years endoscopic ultrasound guided-liver biopsy (EUS-LB) has come to the forefront as a safe and effective method for obtaining tissue in CLD. There are several studies of the safety of EUS-LB as well as the adequacy of specimens obtained in this fashion. Most studies involve a 19-gauge needle, therefore in this study the investigators hope to compare the tissue yields of a 22-gauge fine needle biopsy (FNB) needle, in comparison to conventional 19-gauge. The investigators predict that 19 and 22 gauge FNB needle will demonstrate similar diagnostic accuracy, with less visible blood artifact. Similarly the investigators predict the safety to be equal.
Read the detailed description
3 BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE Chronic liver disease has a number of causes, and leads to significant mortality and morbidity in the United States. It has been estimated that roughly 36,000 individuals die annually from the burden of chronic liver disease, thus early diagnosis and intervention are paramount to preventing such complications. Though serologic markers and non-invasive diagnostic imaging modalities are used as a method for determining the underlying disease process, these methods lack the specificity of determining etiology of a patient's chronic liver disease. Therefore, liver biopsy remains the "gold standard" for obtaining valuable diagnostic and prognostic information.
At present there exist several methods for liver tissue acquisition. The most widely accepted method remains percutaneous route (PLB), which utilizes percussion or imaging to localization the biopsy site. The issue with this approach is its potential complication of post-procedural pain in up to 84%, bleeding in 1/2500-10,000 procedures, with under 1/10,000 of these cases being fatal. Another means for obtaining tissue samples is the transjugular route (TLB), which also allows for portal pressure measurement, and is usually reserved for patients with coagulopathy.
More recently, endoscopic ultrasound guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) has been developed as a newer LB technique. The feasibility of EUS-LB for liver lesions has been validated yielding excellent diagnostic results in several studies. This technique has also been evaluated for hepatic parenchymal disease with up to 90% diagnostic yield. Subsequently, EUS-LB using a 19-gauge needle was compared to percutaneous/transjugular routes showing at least comparative, and in some instances improved sample acquisition, versus other methods. Different 19-gauge needles have been utilized in this setting yielding variable diagnostic specimens. However, there has yet to be comparison of 19 versus a 22-gauge core biopsy needle for EUS-LB. The safety profile with the 19g needle is remarkably good; it seems logical that a smaller needle would be at least as good, if not better.
Primary End Points
- Proportion of cases for which a histologic diagnosis could be made based upon the amount of tissue obtained with the needle (using total portal structures > 5 or length of the longest piece (LLP) > 15 mm).
- Number of portal tracts (PT) in the specimen
- Aggregate specimen length (ASL), length of the longest piece (LLP), and degree of fragmentation Secondary End Points
- Presence of a visible core specimen 2. Presence of visible clots in specimen 3. Adverse events (AE) and serious adverse events (SAE) 4 HYPOTHESIS AND SPECIFIC aims
4.1 Hypothesis The investigators predict that the 19-gauge needle and 22-gauge core needle will have similar ability to obtain adequate EUS-LB specimens 4.2 Specific Aim 1 To determine the adequacy of EUS-LB using a 22-gauge core needle as compared with 19-gauge needle 4.3 Specific Aim 2 To determine if the 22-gauge core needle will demonstrate less blood artifact during the time of EUS-LB as compared with 19-gauge needle.
6 STUDY DESIGN 6.1 Description This is a prospective trial comparing the biopsy specimen adequacy of 19 versus 22-gauge core needle for EUS-LB.
6 6.3 Recruitment Patients shall be recruited in the pre-procedural endoscopy area. After identifying subjects, a study investigator shall discuss the study in detail either in person (at which point the patient will read the consent form). A second individual will witness the consent.
6.4 Study Duration 6.4.1 Approximate Duration of Subject Participation Participation in this study is until 1 week post-procedure. 6.4.2 Approximate Duration of Study The duration of the study shall last until 6 months from enrollment of the last study participant. This shall allow for analysis of final data points and construction of a manuscript.
6.5 Procedures Epic electronic health records database will allow for availability of demographic data and office-based follow-up records. Provation MD software information will provide details regarding endoscopic parameters and intervention performed.
Electronic records gathered for study purposes will only be available to study investigators and will be stored on an encrypted hard drive on a computer. Data will initially be entered with protected health information (PHI) attached so that all information can be obtained. Once all data collection is complete identifiers will be removed and random number assigned to the patients.
Paper copies of study questionnaires will be filled out in the endoscopy center and stored in a locked cabinet in the endoscopy center workroom. The door to the workroom with the cabinet is locked after hours and the endoscopy center is locked after hours as well.
Upon initial encounter, the study shall be described to the patient in detail by one of the study investigators and informed consent obtained.
Once the patients has agreed to participate, demographic data will be obtained including; age, gender, height [inches (in)], weight [pounds (lb)], body mass index (BMI)(lb/in2), past medical history [in particular diagnosis of liver disease, biliary or pancreatic disease, ascites, encephalopathy, portal hypertension, portal hypertension-related bleeding (ie. varices), liver cancer or masses]. Past surgical history shall be obtained regarding prior cholecystectomy, hepatobiliary or pancreatic surgery (i.e. pancreaticojejunostomy) or bariatric surgery (ie. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass). Medication and social history shall be performed regarding alcohol intake per week and hepatotoxic medications (i.e. acetaminophen). A baseline INR and platelet count shall be performed on all individuals prior to EUS-LB, as is the standard of care.
EUS-LB Protocol
Patients undergoing EUS-LB receive sedation prior to the procedure, as per normal practice. This is provided by a certified registered nurse anesthetist (CRNA). The endosonographic study will be conducted with a linear array echoendoscope (GF-UC140-AL5; Olympus America, Center Valley, PA). Before needle puncture of the desired lobe, color Doppler imaging will be used to ensure the lack of vascular structures in the trajectory of the needle. The EUS-LB will be performed in widely separated regions of the liver using a 19-gauge EUS-FNA (fine needle aspiration) needle (Expect Flexible 19g, Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA) and a 22-gauge FNB needle (SharkCore, Beacon Endoscopic, Sunnyvale, CA, or Acquire 22g, Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA). A computer-generated randomized schema shall determine initial needle gauge selection.
The left lobe is described as liver parenchyma identified a few centimeters below the gastroesophageal junction with the echoendoscope torqued clockwise. The right lobe is consider the large area of liver tissue can be seen through the duodenal bulb, near the gallbladder. The stylet is removed, heparin flushed through the needle lumen, and the suction device set and attached to the needle hub. The prepared needle is then inserted into the echoendoscope, A transgastric approach will be used to obtain samples from the left lobe of the liver; a transduodenal approach, with the linear echoendoscope positioned in the duodenal bulb, will be used to obtain samples from the large amount of liver parenchyma seen in that location. Once adequate liver parenchymal penetration will be achieved with the needle (∼2-6 cm), full suction will be applied with a 20-mL vacuum syringe. One pass consists of a total of 7 to 10 to-and-fro needle motions with the fanning technique applied under direct and continuous endosonographic visualization of the tip of the needle.
The needle will then be removed from the echoendoscope. The specimen will be pushed from the needle with the stylet directly into a microsieve, and blood washed from the specimen with a gentle saline rinse. The endosonographer looks for multiple pieces of light brown tissue approximately 5 to 15 mm in length. The tissue cores are then "floated" off the microsieve into formalin solution. Then, a second pass will be made from the same region of the liver using the alternate needle used from the first pass. Heparin is flushed through the needle lumen prior to the next pass. The biopsy process is then repeated on the opposite liver lobe. Two passes per liver lobe are made; one with the standard 19g EUS-FNA needle, and one with the 22g EUS core needle. All patients are closely observed in the recovery area for 1 hour after the procedure, as per our standard policy. Patients will be followed-up with by a phone call the next day and at 1 week after the procedure.
Sample Processing The surgical pathology department, per a specific protocol for clinical practice, will process the EUS-LB samples. Tissue samples are left in formalin for at least 1 hour before processing. The contents of the formalin jar will be poured into a petri dish, and visible cores of liver tissue picked out with small forceps by the surgical pathology technician. These pieces are arranged in a linear fashion on lens paper, then the specimen photographed alongside a ruler to estimates pre-processing tissue lengths. Samples from both lobes and the different needles will be submitted for evaluation separately. The tissue will be processed in standard fashion, and slide blanks made (5-μm tissue thickness). These blanks are stained with hematoxylin and eosin, trichrome, and reticulin, with other special stains done as needed. The slides is digitized using a whole slide scanner (ScanScope CS; Aperio Technologies, Inc, Vista, CA), and the digitized images used for quantitative analysis (eSlide Manager; Aperio Technologies, Inc). Quantification of sample length (mm) and portal triads is performed by 2 of the investigators, annotating the digital images with the software. Fellowship-trained GI pathologists then perform histologic interpretation for clinical use.
Post-Procedural Follow-up After undergoing the procedure, patients will receive a 1week follow-up phone call to monitor for adverse events (i.e. bleeding).
- Being tested
- EUS-guided liver biopsy
- Keywords
- EUS, Biopsy, Liver, FNA, FNB
- Medical subject headings
- Liver Diseases
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
EUS-guided liver biopsyDevice
Endoscopic ultrasound guided liver biopsy
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| 19 Left | Active comparator | EUS-guided liver biopsy using a19-gauge liver biopsy in the left lobe Receives: Device: EUS-guided liver biopsy |
| 22 Left | Experimental | EUS-guided liver biopsy using a 22-gauge liver biopsy in the left lobe Receives: Device: EUS-guided liver biopsy |
| 19 Right | Active comparator | EUS-guided liver biopsy using a 19-gauge liver biopsy in the right lobe Receives: Device: EUS-guided liver biopsy |
| 22 Right | Experimental | EUS-guided liver biopsy using a 22-gauge liver biopsy in the right lobe Receives: Device: EUS-guided liver biopsy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Number of Specimens for Which a Histologic Diagnosis Could be Made Based Upon the Amount of Tissue Obtained With the Needle
Defined by total portal structures > 5 or length of the longest piece > 15 mm) Subjects underwent a left liver biopsy using a 19-gauge FNA needle, 22-gauge FNB needle, right liver biopsies also using the 19-gauge FNA and 22-gauge FNB.
FNA-fine needle aspiration FNB-fine needle biopsy
Measured: 7 days
Secondary outcomes (9)
The Number of Specimens With a Visible Core After Needle Biopsy
Presence of a visible core specimen (yes/no) Subjects underwent a left liver biopsy using a 19-gauge FNA needle, 22-gauge FNB needle, right liver biopsies also using the 19-gauge FNA and 22-gauge FNB.
FNA-fine needle aspiration FNB-fine needle biopsy
Measured: Day of Procedure
The Number of Specimens With a Visible Clot After Needle Biopsy
Presence of visible clots in specimen (yes/no) Subjects underwent a left liver biopsy using a 19-gauge FNA needle, 22-gauge FNB needle, right liver biopsies also using the 19-gauge FNA and 22-gauge FNB.
FNA-fine needle aspiration FNB-fine needle biopsy
Measured: Day of Procedure
The Number of Patients With Visible Bleeding After Needle Biopsy
Patient with blood visible from patient's mouth, rectum with a 2 gram drop in hemoglobin Subjects underwent a left liver biopsy using a 19-gauge FNA needle, 22-gauge FNB needle, right liver biopsies also using the 19-gauge FNA and 22-gauge FNB.
FNA-fine needle aspiration FNB-fine needle biopsy
Measured: 7 days
The Number of Patients With Pain 1 Day After Needle Biopsy
Pain using Likert score 0-10 (10 worst) Subjects underwent a left liver biopsy using a 19-gauge FNA needle, 22-gauge FNB needle, right liver biopsies also using the 19-gauge FNA and 22-gauge FNB.
FNA-fine needle aspiration FNB-fine needle biopsy
Measured: 1 days
The Number of Patients With Pain 7 Day After Needle Biopsy
Pain using Likert score 0-10 (10 worst) Subjects underwent a left liver biopsy using a 19-gauge FNA needle, 22-gauge FNB needle, right liver biopsies also using the 19-gauge FNA and 22-gauge FNB.
FNA-fine needle aspiration FNB-fine needle biopsy
Measured: 7 days
The Number of Patients Requiring Medical Care After Needle Biopsy
Patient requiring visit to healthcare center (emergency room, hospital, call to service) within time 7 days Subjects underwent a left liver biopsy using a 19-gauge FNA needle, 22-gauge FNB needle, right liver biopsies also using the 19-gauge FNA and 22-gauge FNB.
FNA-fine needle aspiration FNB-fine needle biopsy
Measured: 7 Days
Number of Portal Tracts (PT) in the Specimen (Total) Under Histologic Examination
Number of portal tracts (PT) in the specimen (total) under histologic examination Subjects underwent a left liver biopsy using a 19-gauge FNA needle, 22-gauge FNB needle, right liver biopsies also using the 19-gauge FNA and 22-gauge FNB.
FNA-fine needle aspiration FNB-fine needle biopsy
Measured: 7 days
Aggregate Specimen Length Under Histologic Examination
Length of all the tissue (centimeters) by adding the sum of all pieces Subjects underwent a left liver biopsy using a 19-gauge FNA needle, 22-gauge FNB needle, right liver biopsies also using the 19-gauge FNA and 22-gauge FNB.
FNA-fine needle aspiration FNB-fine needle biopsy
Measured: 7 days
Length of the Longest Piece Under Histologic Examination
length of the longest tissue biopsy piece (centimeters) as measured by pathology Subjects underwent a left liver biopsy using a 19-gauge FNA needle, 22-gauge FNB needle, right liver biopsies also using the 19-gauge FNA and 22-gauge FNB.
FNA-fine needle aspiration FNB-fine needle biopsy
Measured: 7 days
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted18 Nov 2016 (estimated)
- Study startAug 2016
- Primary completionJul 2017
- Study completionJul 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (37)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Diagnoses DiseasesStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
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
- Crossover
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Geisinger Clinic
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- David L Diehl, M.D., Principal investigator, Geisinger Clinic
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02967991
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2016-0281
- Acronym
- EUSLB1922
- Status last verified
- Jun 2019
- First submitted
- 15 Nov 2016
- Last updated
- 5 Nov 2019
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Rockey DC, Caldwell SH, Goodman ZD, Nelson RC, Smith AD; American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Liver biopsy. Hepatology. 2009 Mar;49(3):1017-44. doi: 10.1002/hep.22742. No abstract available.
PubMed 19243014Rockey DC, Bissell DM. Noninvasive measures of liver fibrosis. Hepatology. 2006 Feb;43(2 Suppl 1):S113-20. doi: 10.1002/hep.21046.
PubMed 16447288Rockey DC. Noninvasive assessment of liver fibrosis and portal hypertension with transient elastography. Gastroenterology. 2008 Jan;134(1):8-14. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2007.11.053.
PubMed 18166342Ziol M, Handra-Luca A, Kettaneh A, Christidis C, Mal F, Kazemi F, de Ledinghen V, Marcellin P, Dhumeaux D, Trinchet JC, Beaugrand M. Noninvasive assessment of liver fibrosis by measurement of stiffness in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology. 2005 Jan;41(1):48-54. doi: 10.1002/hep.20506.
PubMed 15690481Sherlock S, Dick R, Van Leeuwen DJ. Liver biopsy today. The Royal Free Hospital experience. J Hepatol. 1985;1(1):75-85. doi: 10.1016/s0168-8278(85)80070-2.
PubMed 3902951Eisenberg E, Konopniki M, Veitsman E, Kramskay R, Gaitini D, Baruch Y. Prevalence and characteristics of pain induced by percutaneous liver biopsy. Anesth Analg. 2003 May;96(5):1392-1396. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000060453.74744.17.
PubMed 12707140Perrault J, McGill DB, Ott BJ, Taylor WF. Liver biopsy: complications in 1000 inpatients and outpatients. Gastroenterology. 1978 Jan;74(1):103-6.
PubMed 618417Firpi RJ, Soldevila-Pico C, Abdelmalek MF, Morelli G, Judah J, Nelson DR. Short recovery time after percutaneous liver biopsy: should we change our current practices? Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005 Sep;3(9):926-9. doi: 10.1016/s1542-3565(05)00294-6.
PubMed 16234032Stone MA, Mayberry JF. An audit of ultrasound guided liver biopsies: a need for evidence-based practice. Hepatogastroenterology. 1996 Mar-Apr;43(8):432-4.
PubMed 8714240McGill DB, Rakela J, Zinsmeister AR, Ott BJ. A 21-year experience with major hemorrhage after percutaneous liver biopsy. Gastroenterology. 1990 Nov;99(5):1396-400. doi: 10.1016/0016-5085(90)91167-5.
PubMed 2101588Janes CH, Lindor KD. Outcome of patients hospitalized for complications after outpatient liver biopsy. Ann Intern Med. 1993 Jan 15;118(2):96-8. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-118-2-199301150-00003.
PubMed 8416324Piccinino F, Sagnelli E, Pasquale G, Giusti G. Complications following percutaneous liver biopsy. A multicentre retrospective study on 68,276 biopsies. J Hepatol. 1986;2(2):165-73. doi: 10.1016/s0168-8278(86)80075-7.
PubMed 3958472Huang JF, Hsieh MY, Dai CY, Hou NJ, Lee LP, Lin ZY, Chen SC, Wang LY, Hsieh MY, Chang WY, Yu ML, Chuang WL. The incidence and risks of liver biopsy in non-cirrhotic patients: An evaluation of 3806 biopsies. Gut. 2007 May;56(5):736-7. doi: 10.1136/gut.2006.115410. No abstract available.
PubMed 17440193Cadranel JF, Rufat P, Degos F. Practices of liver biopsy in France: results of a prospective nationwide survey. For the Group of Epidemiology of the French Association for the Study of the Liver (AFEF). Hepatology. 2000 Sep;32(3):477-81. doi: 10.1053/jhep.2000.16602.
PubMed 10960438Myers RP, Fong A, Shaheen AA. Utilization rates, complications and costs of percutaneous liver biopsy: a population-based study including 4275 biopsies. Liver Int. 2008 May;28(5):705-12. doi: 10.1111/j.1478-3231.2008.01691.x.
PubMed 18433397
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 5 Nov 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- 19 Versus 22-Gauge Fine Needle Biopsy (FNB) Needles for Endoscopic Ultrasound Guided Liver Biopsy (EUS-LB): A Prospective Pilot Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02967991
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- EUSLB1922 / 2016-0281
- Keywords
- EUS, Biopsy, Liver, FNA, FNB
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Geisinger ClinicUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Aug 2016
- Primary completion
- Jul 2017 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jul 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 18 Nov 2016 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 5 Nov 2019
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Chronic liver disorders (CLD) are a major cause of morbidity and mortality for individuals in the US. Though serologic analysis will often lead to a conclusive diagnosis, liver biopsy remains an important method for helping to determine the etiology and stage of LD. Percutaneous liver biopsy (PLB), transjugular liver biopsy (TLB) and surgical liver biopsy (SLB) are alternative methods for obtaining hepatic tissue. In recent years endoscopic ultrasound guided-liver biopsy (EUS-LB) has come to the forefront as a safe and effective method for obtaining tissue in CLD. There are several studies of the safety of EUS-LB as well as the adequacy of specimens obtained in this fashion. Most studies involve a 19-gauge needle, therefore in this study the investigators hope to compare the tissue yields of a 22-gauge fine needle biopsy (FNB) needle, in comparison to conventional 19-gauge. The investigators predict that 19 and 22 gauge FNB needle will demonstrate similar diagnostic accuracy, with less visible blood artifact. Similarly the investigators predict the safety to be equal.
Detailed description
3 BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE Chronic liver disease has a number of causes, and leads to significant mortality and morbidity in the United States. It has been estimated that roughly 36,000 individuals die annually from the burden of chronic liver disease, thus early diagnosis and intervention are paramount to preventing such complications. Though serologic markers and non-invasive diagnostic imaging modalities are used as a method for determining the underlying disease process, these methods lack the specificity of determining etiology of a patient's chronic liver disease. Therefore, liver biopsy remains the "gold standard" for obtaining valuable diagnostic and prognostic information.
At present there exist several methods for liver tissue acquisition. The most widely accepted method remains percutaneous route (PLB), which utilizes percussion or imaging to localization the biopsy site. The issue with this approach is its potential complication of post-procedural pain in up to 84%, bleeding in 1/2500-10,000 procedures, with under 1/10,000 of these cases being fatal. Another means for obtaining tissue samples is the transjugular route (TLB), which also allows for portal pressure measurement, and is usually reserved for patients with coagulopathy.
More recently, endoscopic ultrasound guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) has been developed as a newer LB technique. The feasibility of EUS-LB for liver lesions has been validated yielding excellent diagnostic results in several studies. This technique has also been evaluated for hepatic parenchymal disease with up to 90% diagnostic yield. Subsequently, EUS-LB using a 19-gauge needle was compared to percutaneous/transjugular routes showing at least comparative, and in some instances improved sample acquisition, versus other methods. Different 19-gauge needles have been utilized in this setting yielding variable diagnostic specimens. However, there has yet to be comparison of 19 versus a 22-gauge core biopsy needle for EUS-LB. The safety profile with the 19g needle is remarkably good; it seems logical that a smaller needle would be at least as good, if not better.
Primary End Points
- Proportion of cases for which a histologic diagnosis could be made based upon the amount of tissue obtained with the needle (using total portal structures > 5 or length of the longest piece (LLP) > 15 mm).
- Number of portal tracts (PT) in the specimen
- Aggregate specimen length (ASL), length of the longest piece (LLP), and degree of fragmentation Secondary End Points
- Presence of a visible core specimen 2. Presence of visible clots in specimen 3. Adverse events (AE) and serious adverse events (SAE) 4 HYPOTHESIS AND SPECIFIC aims
4.1 Hypothesis The investigators predict that the 19-gauge needle and 22-gauge core needle will have similar ability to obtain adequate EUS-LB specimens 4.2 Specific Aim 1 To determine the adequacy of EUS-LB using a 22-gauge core needle as compared with 19-gauge needle 4.3 Specific Aim 2 To determine if the 22-gauge core needle will demonstrate less blood artifact during the time of EUS-LB as compared with 19-gauge needle.
6 STUDY DESIGN 6.1 Description This is a prospective trial comparing the biopsy specimen adequacy of 19 versus 22-gauge core needle for EUS-LB.
6 6.3 Recruitment Patients shall be recruited in the pre-procedural endoscopy area. After identifying subjects, a study investigator shall discuss the study in detail either in person (at which point the patient will read the consent form). A second individual will witness the consent.
6.4 Study Duration 6.4.1 Approximate Duration of Subject Participation Participation in this study is until 1 week post-procedure. 6.4.2 Approximate Duration of Study The duration of the study shall last until 6 months from enrollment of the last study participant. This shall allow for analysis of final data points and construction of a manuscript.
6.5 Procedures Epic electronic health records database will allow for availability of demographic data and office-based follow-up records. Provation MD software information will provide details regarding endoscopic parameters and intervention performed.
Electronic records gathered for study purposes will only be available to study investigators and will be stored on an encrypted hard drive on a computer. Data will initially be entered with protected health information (PHI) attached so that all information can be obtained. Once all data collection is complete identifiers will be removed and random number assigned to the patients.
Paper copies of study questionnaires will be filled out in the endoscopy center and stored in a locked cabinet in the endoscopy center workroom. The door to the workroom with the cabinet is locked after hours and the endoscopy center is locked after hours as well.
Upon initial encounter, the study shall be described to the patient in detail by one of the study investigators and informed consent obtained.
Once the patients has agreed to participate, demographic data will be obtained including; age, gender, height [inches (in)], weight [pounds (lb)], body mass index (BMI)(lb/in2), past medical history [in particular diagnosis of liver disease, biliary or pancreatic disease, ascites, encephalopathy, portal hypertension, portal hypertension-related bleeding (ie. varices), liver cancer or masses]. Past surgical history shall be obtained regarding prior cholecystectomy, hepatobiliary or pancreatic surgery (i.e. pancreaticojejunostomy) or bariatric surgery (ie. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass). Medication and social history shall be performed regarding alcohol intake per week and hepatotoxic medications (i.e. acetaminophen). A baseline INR and platelet count shall be performed on all individuals prior to EUS-LB, as is the standard of care.
EUS-LB Protocol
Patients undergoing EUS-LB receive sedation prior to the procedure, as per normal practice. This is provided by a certified registered nurse anesthetist (CRNA). The endosonographic study will be conducted with a linear array echoendoscope (GF-UC140-AL5; Olympus America, Center Valley, PA). Before needle puncture of the desired lobe, color Doppler imaging will be used to ensure the lack of vascular structures in the trajectory of the needle. The EUS-LB will be performed in widely separated regions of the liver using a 19-gauge EUS-FNA (fine needle aspiration) needle (Expect Flexible 19g, Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA) and a 22-gauge FNB needle (SharkCore, Beacon Endoscopic, Sunnyvale, CA, or Acquire 22g, Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA). A computer-generated randomized schema shall determine initial needle gauge selection.
The left lobe is described as liver parenchyma identified a few centimeters below the gastroesophageal junction with the echoendoscope torqued clockwise. The right lobe is consider the large area of liver tissue can be seen through the duodenal bulb, near the gallbladder. The stylet is removed, heparin flushed through the needle lumen, and the suction device set and attached to the needle hub. The prepared needle is then inserted into the echoendoscope, A transgastric approach will be used to obtain samples from the left lobe of the liver; a transduodenal approach, with the linear echoendoscope positioned in the duodenal bulb, will be used to obtain samples from the large amount of liver parenchyma seen in that location. Once adequate liver parenchymal penetration will be achieved with the needle (∼2-6 cm), full suction will be applied with a 20-mL vacuum syringe. One pass consists of a total of 7 to 10 to-and-fro needle motions with the fanning technique applied under direct and continuous endosonographic visualization of the tip of the needle.
The needle will then be removed from the echoendoscope. The specimen will be pushed from the needle with the stylet directly into a microsieve, and blood washed from the specimen with a gentle saline rinse. The endosonographer looks for multiple pieces of light brown tissue approximately 5 to 15 mm in length. The tissue cores are then "floated" off the microsieve into formalin solution. Then, a second pass will be made from the same region of the liver using the alternate needle used from the first pass. Heparin is flushed through the needle lumen prior to the next pass. The biopsy process is then repeated on the opposite liver lobe. Two passes per liver lobe are made; one with the standard 19g EUS-FNA needle, and one with the 22g EUS core needle. All patients are closely observed in the recovery area for 1 hour after the procedure, as per our standard policy. Patients will be followed-up with by a phone call the next day and at 1 week after the procedure.
Sample Processing The surgical pathology department, per a specific protocol for clinical practice, will process the EUS-LB samples. Tissue samples are left in formalin for at least 1 hour before processing. The contents of the formalin jar will be poured into a petri dish, and visible cores of liver tissue picked out with small forceps by the surgical pathology technician. These pieces are arranged in a linear fashion on lens paper, then the specimen photographed alongside a ruler to estimates pre-processing tissue lengths. Samples from both lobes and the different needles will be submitted for evaluation separately. The tissue will be processed in standard fashion, and slide blanks made (5-μm tissue thickness). These blanks are stained with hematoxylin and eosin, trichrome, and reticulin, with other special stains done as needed. The slides is digitized using a whole slide scanner (ScanScope CS; Aperio Technologies, Inc, Vista, CA), and the digitized images used for quantitative analysis (eSlide Manager; Aperio Technologies, Inc). Quantification of sample length (mm) and portal triads is performed by 2 of the investigators, annotating the digital images with the software. Fellowship-trained GI pathologists then perform histologic interpretation for clinical use.
Post-Procedural Follow-up After undergoing the procedure, patients will receive a 1week follow-up phone call to monitor for adverse events (i.e. bleeding).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 4
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| 19 Left | Active comparator | Device: EUS-guided liver biopsyEUS-guided liver biopsy using a19-gauge liver biopsy in the left lobe |
| 22 Left | Experimental | Device: EUS-guided liver biopsyEUS-guided liver biopsy using a 22-gauge liver biopsy in the left lobe |
| 19 Right | Active comparator | Device: EUS-guided liver biopsyEUS-guided liver biopsy using a 19-gauge liver biopsy in the right lobe |
| 22 Right | Experimental | Device: EUS-guided liver biopsyEUS-guided liver biopsy using a 22-gauge liver biopsy in the right lobe |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Patients undergoing EUS-LB
- Platelet count > 50,000
- International normalized ratio (INR) < 1.5
- Age > 18 years
- Non-pregnant patients
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- Age < 18 years
- Pregnant Patients
- Inability to obtain consent
- Anticoagulants or anti-platelet agents use (excluding aspirin) within the last 7-10 days
- Platelet count < 50,000
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| EUS-guided liver biopsyEndoscopic ultrasound guided liver biopsy | Device | 19 Left, 19 Right, 22 Left, 22 Right |
Primary outcome
Number of Specimens for Which a Histologic Diagnosis Could be Made Based Upon the Amount of Tissue Obtained With the Needle
Time frame: 7 days
Defined by total portal structures > 5 or length of the longest piece > 15 mm) Subjects underwent a left liver biopsy using a 19-gauge FNA needle, 22-gauge FNB needle, right liver biopsies also using the 19-gauge FNA and 22-gauge FNB. FNA-fine needle aspiration FNB-fine needle biopsy
9 secondary outcomes
The Number of Specimens With a Visible Core After Needle Biopsy
Time frame: Day of Procedure
The Number of Specimens With a Visible Clot After Needle Biopsy
Time frame: Day of Procedure
The Number of Patients With Visible Bleeding After Needle Biopsy
Time frame: 7 days
The Number of Patients With Pain 1 Day After Needle Biopsy
Time frame: 1 days
The Number of Patients With Pain 7 Day After Needle Biopsy
Time frame: 7 days
The Number of Patients Requiring Medical Care After Needle Biopsy
Time frame: 7 Days
Number of Portal Tracts (PT) in the Specimen (Total) Under Histologic Examination
Time frame: 7 days
Aggregate Specimen Length Under Histologic Examination
Time frame: 7 days
Length of the Longest Piece Under Histologic Examination
Time frame: 7 days
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 5 Nov 2019.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 19243014Rockey DC, Caldwell SH, Goodman ZD, Nelson RC, Smith AD; American Association for the Study of Liver Diseases. Liver biopsy. Hepatology. 2009 Mar;49(3):1017-44. doi: 10.1002/hep.22742. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 16447288Rockey DC, Bissell DM. Noninvasive measures of liver fibrosis. Hepatology. 2006 Feb;43(2 Suppl 1):S113-20. doi: 10.1002/hep.21046.
- Background: PubMed 18166342Rockey DC. Noninvasive assessment of liver fibrosis and portal hypertension with transient elastography. Gastroenterology. 2008 Jan;134(1):8-14. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2007.11.053.
- Background: PubMed 15690481Ziol M, Handra-Luca A, Kettaneh A, Christidis C, Mal F, Kazemi F, de Ledinghen V, Marcellin P, Dhumeaux D, Trinchet JC, Beaugrand M. Noninvasive assessment of liver fibrosis by measurement of stiffness in patients with chronic hepatitis C. Hepatology. 2005 Jan;41(1):48-54. doi: 10.1002/hep.20506.
- Background: PubMed 3902951Sherlock S, Dick R, Van Leeuwen DJ. Liver biopsy today. The Royal Free Hospital experience. J Hepatol. 1985;1(1):75-85. doi: 10.1016/s0168-8278(85)80070-2.
- Background: PubMed 12707140Eisenberg E, Konopniki M, Veitsman E, Kramskay R, Gaitini D, Baruch Y. Prevalence and characteristics of pain induced by percutaneous liver biopsy. Anesth Analg. 2003 May;96(5):1392-1396. doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000060453.74744.17.
- Background: PubMed 618417Perrault J, McGill DB, Ott BJ, Taylor WF. Liver biopsy: complications in 1000 inpatients and outpatients. Gastroenterology. 1978 Jan;74(1):103-6.
- Background: PubMed 16234032Firpi RJ, Soldevila-Pico C, Abdelmalek MF, Morelli G, Judah J, Nelson DR. Short recovery time after percutaneous liver biopsy: should we change our current practices? Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2005 Sep;3(9):926-9. doi: 10.1016/s1542-3565(05)00294-6.
- Background: PubMed 8714240Stone MA, Mayberry JF. An audit of ultrasound guided liver biopsies: a need for evidence-based practice. Hepatogastroenterology. 1996 Mar-Apr;43(8):432-4.
- Background: PubMed 2101588McGill DB, Rakela J, Zinsmeister AR, Ott BJ. A 21-year experience with major hemorrhage after percutaneous liver biopsy. Gastroenterology. 1990 Nov;99(5):1396-400. doi: 10.1016/0016-5085(90)91167-5.
- Background: PubMed 8416324Janes CH, Lindor KD. Outcome of patients hospitalized for complications after outpatient liver biopsy. Ann Intern Med. 1993 Jan 15;118(2):96-8. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-118-2-199301150-00003.
- Background: PubMed 3958472Piccinino F, Sagnelli E, Pasquale G, Giusti G. Complications following percutaneous liver biopsy. A multicentre retrospective study on 68,276 biopsies. J Hepatol. 1986;2(2):165-73. doi: 10.1016/s0168-8278(86)80075-7.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Diagnoses Diseases
Not yet recruiting
Pilot Study of a Gastric String Test Combined With a Rapid Antigen Assay for Helicobacter Pylori Detection
Helicobacter Pylori
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Registry of Central Sleep Apnea Patients Undergoing remedē System Implant
Central Sleep Apnea (Diagnosis), Central Sleep Apnea Syndrome
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
Phase II Study of Dato-DXd in Triple-negative Breast Cancer Patients With Newly Diagnosed or Progressing Brain Metastases
Breast Cancer Stage IV
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Diagnostic Performance of Ai vs Junior Dentists
Diagnosis
RecruitingPhase 1/2
Phase I/II Trial: Engineered Donor Graft (Orca Q) for Pediatric Hematopoietic Cell Transplant (HCT)
Acute Myeloid Leukemia, Acute Lymphoid Leukemia
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
David L Diehl, M.D. principal investigator
Geisinger Clinic
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing EUS-guided liver biopsy in people with Diagnoses Diseases and Ultrasound Therapy; Complications, run by Geisinger Clinic 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 5 inclusion and 8 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: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 5 Nov 2019. 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?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 5 Nov 2019). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
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?
Number of Specimens for Which a Histologic Diagnosis Could be Made Based Upon the Amount of Tissue Obtained With the Needle (time frame: 7 days). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02967991, which also lists 37 linked publications.
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 5 Nov 2019.