ArticleBMC gastroenterology2021
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pelvic lesions via the upper and lower gastrointestinal tract approaches.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Rectal metastasis from lung cancer diagnosed by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy: A case report.DEN open · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Value of Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration for Pelvic Space-Occupying Lesions Via Rectal Endoscopic Ultrasound.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Article
- Expanding the horizon of diagnostic endosonograpy: the promise of trans-colorectal endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration.Clinical endoscopy · 2025Article
- The feasibility and safety of trans-colorectal endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration: a retrospective study of Japan.Clinical endoscopy · 2025Article
- Current perspectives on the diversification of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and biopsy.Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001) · 2024Review
- Feasibility and clinical value of linear endoscopic ultrasonography imaging in the lower gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Transrectal endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy for qualitative diagnosis of pelvic space-occupying lesions: a diagnostic test.Translational cancer research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCombining upper and lower gastrointestinal tract (GI) approaches allows expansion of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) indications for pelvic lesions. The upper GI approach has been used for pelvic lesions around the level of the aortoiliac bifurcation in our institution. The aim of this study is to evaluate the feasibility and safety of EUS-FNA for pelvic lesions via the upper and lower GI approaches.
methodsAll consecutive patients who underwent EUS-FNA for the pelvic lesion between January 2008 and December 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Pelvic lesions were defined as lesions located around and below the aortoiliac bifurcation level. The primary outcome was technical success rate, and the secondary outcomes were the diagnostic capability of EUS-FNA for malignancy and the safety.
resultsEUS-FNA for pelvic lesions was performed in 49 patients: upper and lower GI approaches were used in 28 and 21 patients, respectively. The technical success rates were 91.8% (45/49) in all patients: 89.3% (25/28) and 95.2% (20/21) with the upper and lower GI approaches, respectively. Among patients who achieved technical success, the diagnostic accuracy for malignancy was 97.8% (44/45) in all patients: 100% (25/25) and 95.0% (19/20) with the upper and lower GI approaches, respectively. One (2.0%) patient developed an adverse event of sigmoid colon perforation.
conclusionsEUS-FNA for pelvic lesions via the upper and lower GI approaches was a safe, feasible, and effective method, although careful endoscopic manipulation is required to avoid perforation, especially with the lower GI approach. Further large-scale, well-designed studies are needed to validate our findings.
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.