An interventional study of ABC suction sequence and ACB suction sequence in Pancreatic Diseases, sponsored by Changhai Hospital. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in China. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 80 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-06-17.
Sponsored by Changhai Hospital · Not applicable, Interventional, and Diagnostic
The goal of this clinical study is to compare the tissue adequacy, cellularity, blood contamination, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity of the 22G Trident needle combined with three different aspiration techniques (dry-suction, wet-suction, and slow-pull) in Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy for solid pancreatic lesions.
Patients who met the inclusion criteria of this trial and did not meet the exclusion criteria were randomly divided into six groups according to the crossover grouping design. Samples were collected using a 22G Trident needle in different suction sequences. The advantages and disadvantages of different suction techniques in terms of sample quality and diagnostic efficacy were compared to further clarify the optimal suction sampling scheme for Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) using a 22G Trident needle.
169 studies on the registry are indexed under Pancreatic Diseases; 62 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 270 is above the median of 102 across 84 interventional studies indexed under Pancreatic Diseases.
Browse Pancreatic Diseases studies →Changhai Hospital is the lead sponsor of 342 studies on the registry; 133 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
(Before the trial, subjects must meet all of the requirements listed below in order to be enrolled)
Exclusion Criteria:
(Before the trial, participants could not be enrolled if they met any of the following requirements)
Procedure: ABC suction sequence
Procedure: ACB suction sequence
Procedure: BAC suction sequence
Procedure: BCA suction sequence
Procedure: CAB suction sequence
Procedure: CBA suction sequence
Suction sampling should be conducted in the sequence of dry-suction, slow-pull and wet-suction.
Suction sampling should be conducted in the sequence of dry-suction, wet-suction and slow-pull.
Suction sampling should be conducted in the sequence of slow-pull, dry-suction and wet-suction.
Suction sampling should be conducted in the sequence of slow-pull, wet-suction and dry-suction.
Suction sampling should be conducted in the sequence of wet-suction, dry-suction and slow-pull.
Suction sampling should be conducted in the sequence of wet-suction, slow-pull and dry-suction.
Tissue adequacy
Grade A, existing core tissue (defined as structurally intact tissue with a long axis length of at least 550 μm) that clearly characterizes the lesion and is sufficient for diagnosis; Grade B, the presence of core fragments that do not meet the histological criteria for structural integrity, but can still be diagnosed based on cell morphology; Grade C, no diseased tissue is found and no diagnosis can be made based on the sample.
Time frame: 2 months
Cellularity
Grade A: Satisfactory, with more than 4 clusters, each containing at least 10 cells for cytological analysis; Grade B: Adequate, with 2-4 clusters, each containing at least 10 cells for cytological analysis; Grade C: Insufficient, with\<2 clusters suitable for cytological analysis or non-representative samples, or\<50 cells with clear nuclear structures.
Time frame: 2 months
Blood contamination
The histological blood contamination score is assessed by grading the percentage of red blood cells in the entire 40x magnified field of view. Grade A: Red blood cells are present in\<25%of the slides; Grade B: Red blood cells occupy 25%-50%of the slide; Grade C: Red blood cells are present in\>50%of the slides; Grade D: No tissue.
Time frame: 2 months
Diagnostic accuracy
Diagnostic accuracy was calculated as the proportion of true positive and true negative in all evaluated cases.
Time frame: 6 months
Diagnostic sensitivity
Diagnostic sensitivity was calculated as the proportion of true positives in patient cases.
Time frame: 6 months
Diagnostic specificity
Diagnostic specificity was calculated as proportion of true negative in healthy cases.
Time frame: 6 months
Plan to share: No
No publications or documents are linked to this record.
This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Jun 2025. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Changhai Hospital