Literature DB >> 30497087

Forward-viewing echoendoscope versus standard echoendoscope for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition of solid lesions: a randomized, multicenter study.

Alberto Larghi1, Mostafa Ibrahim2, Lorenzo Fuccio3, Selma Lekkerkerker4, Pierre Eisendrath2, Leonardo Frazzoni3, Paul Fockens4, Marina La Marca3, Jeanin E van Hooft4, Jacques Deviere2, Guido Costamagna1,5,6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A forward-viewing linear (FVL) echoendoscope has been developed with the aim of overcoming some of the limitations of standard curved linear-array (CLA) echoendoscopes. There are no existing studies comparing the performance of the two echoendoscopes for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) of solid lesions other than subepithelial lesions.
METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial with a noninferiority design comparing FVL vs. CLA echoendoscopes in patients with solid lesions of the gastrointestinal tract or adjacent organs. Primary outcomes were successful identification of the lesion and success of EUS-TA. Secondary outcomes were safety, sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of the two different scopes for EUS-TA.
RESULTS: 126 patients with solid lesions were randomly assigned to the CLA group (63 patients) or the FVL group (63 patients). The two groups were homogeneous with no differences in terms of needle type used, mean number of passes, and site of EUS-TA. No differences were observed between the FVL vs. CLA scopes in identification of the lesion (96.8 % vs. 98.4 %; P > 0.99) and technical success of EUS-TA (92.1 % vs. 96.8 %; P = 0.44). No adverse events occurred. Overall, diagnostic accuracy (77.8 % vs. 84.1 %), sensitivity (76.6 % vs. 84.1 %), and specificity (81.3 % vs. 84.2 %) did not differ between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results strongly suggest that the FVL echoendoscope is noninferior to the CLA scope for the detection and performance of EUS-TA in patients with solid lesions of the gastrointestinal tract and adjacent organs. In addition, the FVL scope has the same diagnostic yield, accuracy, and safety as the CLA scope. © Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30497087     DOI: 10.1055/a-0790-8342

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Endoscopy        ISSN: 0013-726X            Impact factor:   10.093


  4 in total

1.  Difficult pyloric intubation during EUS: Forward viewing echoendoscope to the rescue (with videos).

Authors:  Phonthep Angsuwatcharakon; Ben S Singh; Irina M Cazacu; Brian R Weston; Manoop S Bhutani
Journal:  Endosc Ultrasound       Date:  2019 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.628

2.  Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pelvic lesions via the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract approaches.

Authors:  Naoki Mita; Takuji Iwashita; Akihiko Senju; Hironao Ichikawa; Yuhei Iwasa; Shinya Uemura; Ichiro Yasuda; Masahito Shimizu
Journal:  BMC Gastroenterol       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 3.067

3.  Evaluation of a novel radial echoendosonoscope with a piezoelectric-composite transducer: An open-label, multicenter, randomized, parallel-group, noninferiority clinical trial.

Authors:  Sheng Wang; Jintao Guo; Xiang Liu; Nan Ge; Guoxin Wang; Jinlong Hu; Kai Zhang; Siyu Sun
Journal:  Endosc Ultrasound       Date:  2021 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 5.628

Review 4.  EUS-guided gastroenterostomy versus surgical gastroenterostomy for the management of gastric outlet obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Anand Kumar; Saurabh Chandan; Babu P Mohan; Pradeep R Atla; Evin J McCabe; David H Robbins; Arvind J Trindade; Petros C Benias
Journal:  Endosc Int Open       Date:  2022-04-14
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.