Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT05295537

Percutaneous Versus Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Liver Biopsy (PEREUS)

Although the use of liver biopsy (LB) has decreased with the emerging non-invasive markers and techniques to evaluate liver fibrosis, histopathologic examination of liver tissue is necessary to confirm the type of liver injury. The aim of our study is to compare two methods for obtaining histological material from the liver: the percutaneous liver biopsy (PLB) and the Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB)

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Hospital Clinico Universitario de Santiago

Santiago de Compostela, A Coruña, 15706, Spain

About this study

LB remains the gold standard diagnostic test for most of the focal and parenchymal liver diseases. LB has an important diagnostic role in selected parenchymal liver diseases such as autoimmune hepatitis and infiltrative liver disorders, and in some cases, it helps clinicians to elucidate between overlapping diagnoses Traditionally, percutaneous (PLB) or transjugular approaches have been used to acquire liver samples. In recent tears EUS has emerged as an alternative and safe method to obtain liver samples, by puncturing the liver from the gastric or duodenal wall. In fact, EUS-guided LB has been shown equal or superior compared to PLB and transjugular approaches in retrospective series. EUS - LB has shown to produce excellent histological performance based on liver society guidelines requirements for parameters used in assessing histological yield which include the number of complete portal triads (CPT), sample size and total specimen length (TSL) with a low rate of adverse events EUS - LB has several advantages over the traditional liver biopsy methods: it provides simultaneous access to both liver lobes, enables real-time visualization avoiding the puncture of a large vessel and then reducing the rate of complications, it allows to perform a simultaneously endoscopic and endosonography evaluation of the pancreatobiliary system and it could decrease the level of the anxiety of patients (by the use of deep sedation) and then perhaps increasing the satisfaction with the procedure Despite the fact of the high diagnostic yield of EUS-LB in obtaining adequate samples from the liver and the low rate of adverse events reported with this method, there is an almost complete lack of randomized trials comparing EUS - LB with the traditional percutaneous route.

The aim of our study is to compare the quality of samples obtained and the diagnostic efficacy of EUS - LB against PLB in all patients that have an indication for a liver biopsy

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Patients for whom a liver biopsy have been indicated.

Inclusion criteria

  • Age over 18 years, any gender
  • Understanding and informed consent signed
  • Fit for deep sedation

Exclusion criteria

  • Age below 18 years
  • Not signed informed consent
  • Contraindication for a deep sedation
  • Pregnancy
  • Focal liver lesion that requires biopsy visualized by other imaging techniques
  • Coagulopathy (INR>1.5 or platelets < 50,000)
  • Inability to withdraw anticoagulant or antithrombotic agents

Treatment and study plan

PERCUTANEOUS LIVER BIOPSY (PLB)

Procedure

Percutaneous liver biopsy using a 16 gauge (G) Trucut needle.

ENDOSCOPIC ULTRASOUND GUIDED LIVER BIOPSY (EUS-LB)

Procedure

EUS-guided liver biopsy using a 19 gauge (G) Franseen core EUS needle

Primary outcomes

  1. Quality of tissue samples obtained by EUS-guided liver biopsy compared to percutaneous liver biopsy.

    Time frame: Up to 2 weeks

    The quality of samples is based in the combination of a specimen length >20 mms and more than 10 complete portal triads (both conditions are required).

Secondary outcomes

  1. Diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided liver biopsy compared to percutaneous liver biopsy.

    Time frame: Up to 2 weeks

    Percentage of samples allowing an adequate histological diagnosis.

  2. Adverse events associated with EUS-guided liver biopsy compared to percutaneous liver biopsy.

    Time frame: At 1 hour, 4 hours, 24 hours, 7 days, and 30 days

    Adverse events evaluated according to the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) lexicon.

  3. Patient satisfaction after EUS-guided liver biopsy compared to percutaneous liver biopsy.

    Time frame: 24 hours

    Satisfaction survey that includes five points; four are questions scored from 1: bad to 5: excellent; and one is a dichotomic question (Yes/No). Survey will be performed 24 hours after the procedure by phone call.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Hospital Clinico Universitario de Santiago

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Prospective, Randomized, Comparative, Non-inferiority, Multicentre Trial of Quality of Samples Obtained by Percutaneous Liver Biopsy Versus Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Liver Biopsy

Acronym: PEREUS

Important dates

Study start
2022
Primary completion
2022
Study completion
2022
First posted
Mar 25, 2022
Registry last updated
Mar 1, 2023

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.