Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33027584›Full record

ArticleClinical endoscopy2020

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided, Percutaneous, and Transjugular Liver Biopsy: A Comparative Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Thomas R McCarty, Ahmad Najdat Bazarbashi, Basile Njei, Marvin Ryou, Harry R Aslanian, Thiruvengadam Muniraj

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy: refining a new approach.Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Endo-hepatology: Bridging the gap between lumen and liver.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. How to incorporate endohepatology into your bariatric practice.iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights · 2024
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Advances in Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS)-Guided Liver Biopsy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Thomas R McCartyDivision of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Endoscopy, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Ahmad Najdat BazarbashiDivision of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Endoscopy, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Basile NjeiSection of Digestive Diseases, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Marvin RyouDivision of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Endoscopy, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Harry R AslanianSection of Digestive Diseases, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Thiruvengadam MunirajSection of Digestive Diseases, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsPercutaneous liver biopsy (PCLB) or transjugular liver biopsy (TJLB) have traditionally been performed to obtain a sample of hepatic tissue; however, endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUSLB) has become an attractive alternative. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of EUSLB, PCLB, and TJLB.

methodsSearch strategies were developed in accordance with PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. Major outcomes included the following: adequacy of biopsy specimens (i.e., complete portal triads [CPT], total specimen length [TSL] in mm, and length of longest piece [LLP]) in mm), and rate of adverse events. Only studies comparing all biopsy approaches (i.e., EUSLB, PCLB, and TJLB) were included.

resultsFive studies (EUSLB [n=301]; PCLB [n=176]; and TJLB [n=179]) were included. Biopsy cumulative adequacy rates for EUSLB, PCLB, and TJLB were 93.51%, 98.27%, and 97.61%, respectively. Based on the subgroup analysis limited to EUS biopsy needles in current clinical practice, there was no difference in biopsy adequacy or adverse events for EUSLB compared to PCLB and TJLB (all p>0.050). A comparison of EUSLB and PCLB revealed no difference between specimens regarding both CPT (p=0.079) and LLP (p=0.085); however, a longer TSL (p<0.001) was observed. Compared to TJLB, EUSLB showed no difference in LLP (p=0.351), fewer CPT (p=0.042), and longer TSL (p=0.005).

conclusionEUSLB appears to be a safe, minimally invasive procedure that is comparable to PCLB and TJLB regarding biopsy specimens obtained and rate of adverse events associated with each method.

Indexed as

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)Interventional endoscopyLiver biopsy

Identifiers

PMID33027584
PMCPMC7548145

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.