SynthesisDigestive diseases and sciences2015
Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Biopsy for Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Pelvic Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Low vitamin D levels are associated with high viral loads in patients with chronic hepatitis B: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC gastroenterology · 2019Pooled it
- Diagnostic Value of Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration for Pelvic Space-Occupying Lesions Via Rectal Endoscopic Ultrasound.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Lumen-apposing metal stent for drainage of a perirectal abscess complicating endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy.Endoscopy · 2025Article
- The feasibility and safety of trans-colorectal endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration: a retrospective study of Japan.Clinical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Expanding the horizon of diagnostic endosonograpy: the promise of trans-colorectal endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration.Clinical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Antibiotic prophylaxis in digestive endoscopy: Guidelines from the French Society of Digestive Endoscopy.Endoscopy international open · 2024Article
- Transrectal endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy for qualitative diagnosis of pelvic space-occupying lesions: a diagnostic test.Translational cancer research · 2022Article
- Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pelvic lesions via the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract approaches.BMC gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Double Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography in Preoperative T Staging of Gastric Cancer: A Comparison With Endoscopic Ultrasonography.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Article
- The role of endoscopic ultrasound on the preoperative T staging of gastric cancer: A retrospective study.Medicine · 2016Observational
- Role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in the diagnosis of mass lesions.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2016Article
- EUS-FNA for Pelvic Lesions: Is This the Final Answer?Digestive diseases and sciences · 2015Article
- Exploration of an effective training system for the diagnosis of pancreatobiliary diseases with EUS: A prospective study.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPreoperative diagnosis of pelvic lesions remains challenging despite advances in imaging technologies. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided biopsy is an effective diagnostic modality for sampling the digestive tract and surrounding areas. However, a meta-analysis summarizing the diagnostic efficacy of EUS-guided biopsy for pelvic lesions has not been published.
aimsWe aimed to evaluate the utility of EUS-guided biopsy in the diagnosis of pelvic lesions.
methodsArticles were identified via structured database search; only studies where pelvic lesions were confirmed by surgery or clinical follow-up were included. Data extracted were selected with strict criteria. A fixed-effects model was used to estimate the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). A summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) was also constructed.
resultsTen studies containing a total of 246 patients were included. The pooled sensitivity of EUS-guided biopsy for differential diagnosis of pelvic masses was 0.89 (95% CI 0.83-0.94), and the specificity was 0.93 (95% CI 0.86-0.97). The area under the SROC was 0.9631. The combined PLR, NLR, and DOR were 11.75 (95% CI 5.90-23.43), 0.12 (95% CI 0.07-0.20), and 100.06 (95% CI 37.48-267.10) respectively. There is potential presence of publication bias in this meta-analysis.
conclusionsOur meta-analysis shows that EUS-guided biopsy is a powerful tool for differentiating pelvic masses with a high sensitivity and specificity. Furthermore, it is a safe procedure with low rate of complication, although more high-quality prospective studies are required to be done.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.