Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33060723›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Transpapillary tissue sampling of biliary strictures: balloon dilatation prior to forceps biopsy improves sensitivity and accuracy.

Daniel Pörner, Dominik J Kaczmarek, Dominik Heling, Annekristin Hausen, Raphael Mohr, Robert Hüneburg, Hanno Matthaei, Tim R Glowka, Steffen Manekeller, Hans-Peter Fischer and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Endoscopic evaluation of indeterminate biliary strictures: Cholangioscopy, endoscopic ultrasound, or both?Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2024
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
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

15 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Daniel PörnerDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Dominik J KaczmarekDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Dominik HelingDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Annekristin HausenDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Raphael MohrDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Robert HüneburgDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Hanno MatthaeiDepartment of Surgery, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Tim R GlowkaDepartment of Surgery, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Steffen ManekellerDepartment of Surgery, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Hans-Peter FischerInstitute of Pathology, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Marieta TomaInstitute of Pathology, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Jacob NattermannDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Christian P StrassburgDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Maria A Gonzalez-CarmonaDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany.
Tobias J WeismüllerDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127, Bonn, Germany. Tobias.Weismueller@ukbonn.de.
University Hospital Bonn · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The early and definitive diagnosis of malignant bile duct stenoses is essential for a timely and adequate therapy. However, tissue sampling with transpapillary brush cytology (BC) or forceps biopsy (FB) remains challenging. With this study, we aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of different tissue sampling modalities (BC, FB without/after previous balloon dilatation). Standardized database research identified all patients, who underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiography with BC and/or FB for indeterminate bile duct stenosis between January 2010 and April 2018 and with a definitive diagnosis. 218 patients were enrolled (149 cases with malignant and 69 with benign disease). FB had a significant higher sensitivity than BC (43% vs. 16%, p < 0.01). Prior balloon dilatation of the stenosis improved the sensitivity of FB from 41 to 71% (p = 0.03), the NPV from 36 to 81% (p < 0.01) and the accuracy from 55 to 87% (p < 0.01). The complication rates did not differ significantly between the modalities. In our center FB turned out to be the diagnostically more effective procedure. Balloon dilatation of the stenosis before FB had a significant diagnostic benefit and was not associated with a higher complication rate.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBiliary TractBiopsyConstriction, PathologicDilatationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSensitivity and SpecificitySurgical Instruments

Identifiers

PMID33060723
PMCPMC7566456
OpenAlexW3092905634

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.