A mucosal incision assisted biopsy vs. endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration with a rapid on-site evaluation for gastric subepithelial lesions: A randomized crossover study.

Objectives This study aimed to compare the diagnostic yield of mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) with a rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) for gastric subepithelial lesions (SEL) suspected of being gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) with an intraluminal growth pattern. Methods This was a prospective randomized, cross-over multicenter study. The primary outcome was the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA and MIAB. The secondary outcomes were the technical success rate, complication rate, procedure time and biopsy frequency. Results A total of 47 patients were randomized to the MIAB group (n = 23) and EUS-FNA group (n = 24). There was no significant difference in the diagnostic yield of MIAB and EUS-FNA (91.3% vs 70.8%, P = 0.0746). The complication rates of MIAB and EUS-FNA did not differ to a statistically significant extent. The mean procedure time in the MIAB group was significantly longer than that in the EUS-FNA group (34 vs 26 min, P = 0.0011). Conclusions The diagnostic yield of MIAB was satisfactorily as high as EUS-FNA with ROSE for gastric SEL with an intraluminal growth pattern.