Randomized Clinical Trial
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Apr 16, 2025; 17(4): 101998
Published online Apr 16, 2025. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v17.i4.101998
Table 1 Patient details and pancreatic mass characteristics (n = 50)
Characteristics
n (%)
mean age64.1
Range(36-88)
Gender
Female26
Male24
Mean pancreatic mass size (cm)
Mean3.47
Range1.7-7.0
Pancreatic mass location
Head31 (62)
Uncinate6 (12)
Neck6 (12)
Body5 (10)
Tail2 (4)
Vascular invasion32 (64)
Venous vascular invasion
Portal vein16 (51.6)
Superior mesenteric vein19 (61.3)
Splenic vein13 (41.9)
Table 2 Pathological analysis diagnosis
Definitive diagnosis (n = 50)
Standard needle (n = 50)
Franseen needle (n = 50)
Adenocarcinoma/pancreatic cancer (n = 38)n = 31n = 35
Benign lesionChronic pancreatitis (n = 3)Benign lesionChronic pancreatitis (n = 2)
Mucinous neoplasia (n = 1)Mucinous neoplasia (n = 1)
Inconclusive (n = 3)Inconclusive (n = 0)
Neuroendocrine tumorn = 4n = 4
Metastasisn = 2n = 2
LymphomaChromic pancreatitis (n = 1); Lymphoma (n = 0)Chronic pancreatitis (n = 1); Lymphoma (n = 0)
Plasmocitoman = 1n = 1
Solid pseudopapillary tumorn = 1n = 1
Chronic pancreatitisn = 3n = 3
Table 3 Performance of standard needle for the diagnosis of pancreatic malignancy
Diagnostic methodDisease
Pancreatic malignancy1 (n = 47)
Chronic pancreatis (n = 3)
Total
Positive for malignancy38139
Negative for malignancy9211
Total47350
95%CI
Sensitivity0.81 (0.67-0.91)
Specificity0.67 (0.09-0.99)
PPV0.97 (0.87-1.00)
NPV0.18 (0.02-0.52)
Accuracy0.80 (0.66-0.90)
Table 4 Performance of Franseen needle for the diagnosis of pancreatic malignancy
Diagnostic methodDisease
Pancreatic malignancy1 (n = 47)
Chronic pancreatis (n = 3)
Total
Positive for malignancy43144
Negative for malignancy426
Total47350
95%CI
Sensitivity0.91 (0.83-0.98)
Specificity0.67 (0.09-0.98)
PPV0.98 (0.88-1.00)
NPV0.33 (0.04-0.78)
Accuracy0.90 (0.78-0.97)
Table 5 Comparison of the diagnostic performance of standard (fine needle aspiration) and Franseen (fine needle biopsy) needles
Metrics
FNA
FNB
Statistical difference
P value1
Sensitivity0.8090.9155.0000.025
Specificity0.6670.667--
PPV0.9740.9770.9130.361
NPV0.1820.3332.2020.028
Accuracy0.8000.9003.2000.074
Table 6 Comparison of procured histologic tissue areas (in mm2) between standard needle versus Franseen needle

Standard needle
Franseen needle
P value
Mean total tissue area, mm2 (SD)1.16 (0.17)2.07 (0.22)0.001
Median0.451.09
75% IQR1.532.89
Range0-9.760-9.22
Mean total tumor area, mm2 (SD)0.42 (0.09)0.47 (0.09)0.8
Median0.050.05
75% IQR0.510.50
Range0-7.030-4.88
Table 7 Randomized clinical trials comparing fine needle aspiration vs fine needle biopsy needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid pancreatic tumors
Ref.
FNA (n)
FNB (n)
ROSE
Randomization
Technique of sampling
Sensitivity for malignancy (95%CI)-FNA
Sensitivity for malignancy (95%CI)-FNB
P value
Accuracy malignancy (95%CI)-FNA
Accuracy malignancy (95%CI)-FNB
P value
Bang et al[14]22-gauge (28)Reverse bevel (28)YesSequence of the needleCapillarity and dry suction10083.30.26
Bang et al[15]22-gauge (46)Franseen 22-gauge (46)YesSequence of the needle82.697.80.03
Noh et al[16]22-gauge (30)Reverse bevel 22-gauge (30)YesSequence of the needleDry suction9593.30.564
Vanbiervliet et al[17]22-gauge (39)Reverse bevel 22-gauge (41)YesFirst needle FNADry suction92.5900.68
Mavrogenis et al[18]22-gauge (19)Reverse bevel 25-gauge (19)NoSequence of the needleCapillarity and dry suction89.5 (66.82-98.39)89.5 (66.82-98.39)84.8 (67.3-94.2)84.8 (67.3-94.2)
Kovacevic et al[19]22-gauge (33)22-gauge (31)NoSequence of the needleCapillarity65.5%89.7%> 0.569.7 (51.3-84.4)90.3 (74.2-98%)
Our study22-gauge (50)Franseen 22-gauge (50)NoSequence of the needleCapillarity and dry suction0.83 (0.69-0.92)0.91 (0.80-0.98)0.84 (0.71-0.93)0.92 (0.81-0.98)