ArticleBMC gastroenterology2019
Prospective comparison of slow-pull and standard suction techniques of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic cancer.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04843956 (Comparación de Tres técnicas de Biopsia Guiada Por Endosonografia de Lesiones sólidas pancreáticas), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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.
Comparación de Tres técnicas de Biopsia Guiada Por Endosonografia de Lesiones sólidas pancreáticas
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- [Clinical and Technical Guideline for Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Tissue Acquisition of Pancreatic Solid Tumor: Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy].The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi · 2021Guideline
- A Meta-analysis of Slow Pull versus Suction for Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition.Gut and liver · 2021Pooled it
- Clinical and Technical Guideline for Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-Guided Tissue Acquisition of Pancreatic Solid Tumor: Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE).Gut and liver · 2021Guideline
- Moxibustion combined with chemotherapy inhibits gastric cancer growth by modulating the immunosuppressive microenvironment involving the Treg/IL-10/TGF-β1 axis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Comparison of risk of malignancy and predictive value of diagnostic categories defined by Papanicolaou Society of Cytopathology system and WHO reporting system for pancreaticobiliary cytopathology in solid pancreatic lesions.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Risk Factors and Interpretation of Inconclusive Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology in the Diagnosis of Solid Pancreatic Lesions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Early screening and diagnosis strategies of pancreatic cancer: a comprehensive review.Cancer communications (London, England) · 2021Review
- Article
- Impact of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition on Decision-Making in Precision Medicine for Pancreatic Cancer: Beyond Diagnosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Clinical and Technical Guideline for Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-Guided Tissue Acquisition of Pancreatic Solid Tumor: Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (KSGE).Clinical endoscopy · 2021Review
- Slow-pull compared to suction technique for EUS-guided sampling of pancreatic solid lesions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Endoscopy international open · 2020Article
- Optimal sampling technique for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions using a 25-gauge ProCore needle: A multicenter randomized crossover superiority study.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
- Slow-pull capillary techniqueTherapeutic advances in respiratory diseaseArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe usage of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) for the diagnosis of solid pancreatic cancer is increasing, however mainly retrospective studies are available about the detailed methods of sampling.
methodsTo compare prospectively the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA samples obtained with slow-pull (SP) and with standard suction technique (SS).
resultsEUS-FNA sampling was diagnostic in 72 of 92 cases (78.3%). Diagnostic yield was 67.4% in the SS and 65.2% in the SP group. The number of smear pairs (1.84 vs. 3.56; p < 0.001) and blood contamination (1.50 vs. 2.19; p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the SS group, which resulted in lower rate of diagnostic samples (41.8% vs. 30.0%; p = 0.003). There was no difference in the cellularity (1.58 vs. 1.37; p = 0.2554), or in the sensitivity and specificity in the identification of malignancy between SP and SS subgroups (69.9, 100% vs. 73.5, 100%). Histological samples were obtained in 60 cases (with SP: 49 cases; with SS: 46 cases). There was no difference in the diagnostic yield of histological samples between the groups (63 and 58.7%).
conclusionThe diagnostic yield, the cellularity of smears and the rate of acquiring sufficient histological material are similar in the SP and SS group, but due to lower bloodiness and decreased number of slides, the pathological diagnosis is faster and more cost-effective.
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.