Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30600677›Full record

ArticleGut and liver2019

Comparison of the Diagnostic Yield of the Standard 22-Gauge Needle and the New 20-Gauge Forward-Bevel Core Biopsy Needle for Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition from Pancreatic Lesions.

Shinya Fujie, Hirotoshi Ishiwatari, Keiko Sasaki, Junya Sato, Hiroyuki Matsubayashi, Masao Yoshida, Sayo Ito, Noboru Kawata, Kenichiro Imai, Naomi Kakushima and 3 more

Open access · diamondAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Gut and liver, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shinya FujieDivision of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.
Hirotoshi IshiwatariDivision of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.
Keiko SasakiDivision of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.
Junya SatoDivision of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.
Hiroyuki MatsubayashiDivision of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.
Masao YoshidaDivision of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.
Sayo ItoDivision of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.
Noboru KawataDivision of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.
Kenichiro ImaiDivision of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.
Naomi KakushimaDivision of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.
Kohei TakizawaDivision of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.
Kinichi HottaDivision of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.
Hiroyuki OnoDivision of Endoscopy, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan.
Shizuoka Cancer Center · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/Aims: To compare the diagnostic yield of 20-gauge forward-bevel core biopsy needle (CBN) and 22-gauge needle for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine needle aspiration (FNA) of solid pancreatic masses. Methods: The use of 20-gauge CBN was prospectively evaluated for 50 patients who underwent EUS-FNA from June 2016 to December 2016. Data were compared with those obtained by a retrospective study of 50 consecutive patients who underwent EUS-FNA using standard 22-gauge needles between December 2016 and April 2017. At least two punctures were performed for each patient; the sample from the first pass was used for cytology with or without histology and that from the second pass was used for histology. Sample quantity was evaluated using the sample obtained from the second pass. Results: There was no significant difference in the diagnostic accuracy rate between the first and second passes (20-gauge CBN: 96% [48/50]; standard 22-gauge needle: 88% [44/50]). Samples >10× power fields in length were obtained from 90% (43/48) and 60% (30/50) of patients using the 20-gauge CBN and standard 22-gauge needle, respectively (p=0.01). Technical failure occurred for two patients with the 20-gauge CBN. Conclusions: Diagnostic accuracy of the 20-gauge CBN was comparable to that of the 22-gauge needle. However, two passes with the 20-gauge CBN yielded a correct diagnosis for 100% of patients when technically feasible. Moreover, the 20-gauge CBN yielded core tissue for 90% patients, which was a performance superior to that of the 22-gauge needle.

Indexed as

EndosonographyAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiopsy, Large-Core NeedleEquipment DesignFemaleHumansImage-Guided BiopsyMaleMiddle AgedNeedlesPancreasPancreatic NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesBiopsyCore biopsy needleDiagnostic yieldEndoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspirationfine-needlePancreas

Identifiers

PMID30600677
PMCPMC6529169
OpenAlexW2908375662

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.