ArticleMedicine2020
Ethanol-based fixation is superior to conventional brush cytology in the evaluation of indeterminate biliary strictures by endoscopic retrograde cholangiography.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
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
The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic yield of conventional cytology (CC) with ethanol-based fixation, a cytological analysis using an ethanol based fixative system including a cell block procedure (EBF) to evaluate indeterminate biliary strictures (IBStr). We also compared additionally taken fluorescence-guided forceps biopsies (FB) with EBF concerning a potential additive diagnostic benefit.Early detection and accurate diagnosis are crucial for patients with suspected carcinoma within the biliary tree to preserve curative treatment options but diagnostics and patient care in the evaluation of IBStr are still challenging. ERC-guided brush cytology is the gold standard of nonsurgical evaluation of IBStr. However, accuracy is generally low. New specimen processing's are needed to higher the diagnostic yield in the evaluation of IBStr.We performed a retrospective evaluation in 404 patients referred for further diagnosis of IBStr. Gold standard was defined as surgically obtained histology or patient follow-up of at least 1 year to diagnose or exclude malignancy.Three hundred thirty-four patients were included into the final analysis. One hundred seventy-two strictures were malignant, 162 strictures benign. One hundred seventeen specimens were evaluated by CC, 217 processed by EBF. EBF performed significantly better in terms of sensitivity (24.6% vs 60%, P < .001) and accuracy (59.0% vs 75.1%, P = .006). Fifty-eight FB were additionally taken and showed a numerically improved sensitivity compared to EBF alone (80% vs 62.9%, P = .19).EBF is a simple and inexpensive technique that substantially improved sensitivity and accuracy in the evaluation of IBStr. FB specimen did not significantly improve 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.