Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition with or without macroscopic on-site evaluation: randomized controlled trial.

Background: The use of macroscopic on-site evaluation (MOSE) to estimate the adequacy of a specimen for histological diagnosis during endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle tissue acquisition (FNTA) has recently been advocated. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic yield of MOSE compared with conventional EUS-FNTA without rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE).
Methods: This was an international, multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled study. After providing informed consent, consecutive adult patients referred for EUS-FNTA for solid lesions larger than 2 cm were randomized to a MOSE arm or to a conventional arm without ROSE. A designated cytopathologist from each center performed all cytopathological examinations for that center and was blinded to the randomization results. The primary outcome measure was the diagnostic yield, and the secondary outcomes included sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, diagnostic accuracy, and the rate of procedure-related complications.
Results: 244 patients (122 conventional, 122 MOSE) were enrolled during the study period. No significant differences between the two arms were found in procedure time or rate of procedure-related adverse events. The diagnostic yield for the MOSE technique (92.6 %) was similar to that for the conventional technique (89.3 %; P  = 0.37), with significantly fewer passes made (median: conventional 3, MOSE 2; P  < 0.001).
Conclusions: EUS-FNTA with the MOSE technique provided a similar diagnostic yield to conventional EUS-FNTA technique in the absence of ROSE but with fewer passes. This technique can be used when ROSE is not available.
Competing Interests: Professor Teoh is a consultant for Boston Scientific, Cook, Taewoong, Cook, and Microtech Medical corporations. All other authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
(Thieme. All rights reserved.)