ArticleGastroenterology report2020
An exclusive fine-needle biopsy approach to sampling solid lesions under EUS guidance: a prospective cohort study.
Article in Gastroenterology report, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- An Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine-needle Biopsy as a Diagnostic Tool for Isolated Hepatic Sarcoidosis.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2026Article
- Endo-Hepatology: Paradigm Shift in Endosonographic Diagnosis for Liver Disease to Digestive Endoscopy.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2026Review
- Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in the Diagnosis and Management of Liver Diseases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Endoscopic ultrasound-guided pancreatic core-needle/microforceps biopsy is a valuable diagnostic tool for pancreatic lesions: Experience from a large academic institution.American journal of clinical pathology · 2025Article
- Evolution of transbronchial needle aspiration needles: Over the last half century.Chinese medical journal pulmonary and critical care medicine · 2024Review
- Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition for the diagnosis of focal liver lesion.World journal of radiology · 2024Review
- Recent developments in hepatopancreatobiliary EUS.Endoscopic ultrasoundReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) is increasingly utilized to enhance the cytological yield of sampling solid lesions, but its superiority over existing fine-needle aspiration (FNA) platforms has not been clearly demonstrated. The aim of our study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy and procedural outcomes of FNB using a new Franseen-tip needle to that of a traditional FNA in sampling solid lesions under EUS guidance.
methodsConsecutive patients with solid lesions referred for EUS-FNB sampling were included. Procedure-related outcomes were collected prospectively including patient demographics, number of passes performed, diagnostic sample adequacy, adverse events, and recovery time. The Acquire needle was used to sample all lesions in the study group. Consecutive EUS-FNA procedures performed to sample solid lesions using the Expect needle were utilized as controls.
resultsThere were 180 patients undergoing EUS-FNB compared to 183 patients undergoing EUS-FNA procedures for solid-lesion sampling. The procedure time was significantly shorter in patients who underwent FNB compared to FNA (mean: 37.4 vs 44.9 minutes,
conclusionsAn FNB-exclusive approach to sampling solid lesions under EUS guidance is safe and feasible, and may result in fewer overall passes, shorter procedure time, and improved diagnostic adequacy. FNB may replace FNA as the primary sampling modality of choice in all solid lesions.
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.