SynthesisWorld journal of gastroenterology2019
Genetic testing
Synthesis in World journal of gastroenterology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endoscopic management of pancreatic cystic neoplasms.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Review
- Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatic Tissue Sampling: Lesion Assessment, Needles, and Techniques.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Through-the-Needle Biopsy: A Narrative Review of the Technique and Its Emerging Role in Pancreatic Cyst Diagnosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Rare Pancreatic/Peripancreatic Cystic Lesions Can Be Accurately Characterized by EUS with Through-the-Needle Biopsy-A Unique Pictorial Essay with Clinical and Histopathological Correlations.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Molecular Analysis of Pancreatic Cyst Fluid for the Management of Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Advances in the Diagnosis of Pancreatic Cystic Lesions.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Endosonographic diagnosis of advanced neoplasia in intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms.World journal of gastroenterology · 2020Review
- The role of EUS-FNA in the evaluation of pancreatic cystic lesions.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCarcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and cytology in pancreatic cystic fluid are suboptimal for evaluation of pancreatic cystic neoplasms. Genetic testing and microforceps biopsy are promising tools for pre-operative diagnostic improvement but comparative performance of both methods is unknown.
aimTo compare the accuracy of genetic testing and microforceps biopsy in pancreatic cysts referred for surgery.
methodsWe performed a literature search in Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science for studies evaluating genetic testing of cystic fluid and microforceps biopsy of pancreatic cysts, with endoscopic ultrasound with fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) prior to surgery and surgical pathology as reference standard for diagnosis. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy for: 1- benign cysts; 2- mucinous low-risk cysts; 3- high-risk cysts, and the diagnostic yield and rate of correctly identified cysts with microforceps biopsy and molecular analysis. We also assessed publication bias, heterogeneity, and study quality.
resultsEight studies, including 1206 patients, of which 203 (17%) referred for surgery who met the inclusion criteria were analyzed in the systematic review, and seven studies were included in the meta-analysis. Genetic testing and microforceps biopsies were identical for diagnosis of benign cysts. Molecular analysis was superior for diagnosis of both low and high-risk mucinous cysts, with sensitivities of 0.89 (95%CI: 0.79-0.95) and 0.57 (95%CI: 0.42-0.71), specificities of 0.88 (95%CI: 0.75-0.95) and 0.88 (95%CI: 0.80-0.93) and AUC of 0.9555 and 0.92, respectively. The diagnostic yield was higher in microforceps biopsies than in genetic analysis (0.73
conclusionGenetic testing and microforceps biopsies are useful second tests, with identical results in benign pancreatic cysts. Genetic analysis performs better for low- and high-risk cysts but has lower diagnostic yield.
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.