Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33657780›Full record

ArticleClinical endoscopy2021

Comparison of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition Using a 20-Gauge Menghini Needle with a Lateral Forward Bevel and a 22-Gauge Franseen Needle: A Single-Center Large Cohort Study.

Takafumi Mie, Takashi Sasaki, Ryo Kanata, Takaaki Furukawa, Tsuyoshi Takeda, Akiyoshi Kasuga, Masato Matsuyama, Masato Ozaka, Naoki Sasahira

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

9 authors.

Takafumi MieDepartment of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Medicine, Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.
Takashi SasakiDepartment of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Medicine, Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.
Ryo KanataDepartment of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Medicine, Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.
Takaaki FurukawaDepartment of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Medicine, Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.
Tsuyoshi TakedaDepartment of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Medicine, Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.
Akiyoshi KasugaDepartment of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Medicine, Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.
Masato MatsuyamaDepartment of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Medicine, Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.
Masato OzakaDepartment of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Medicine, Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.
Naoki SasahiraDepartment of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Medicine, Cancer Institute Hospital of Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Tokyo, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND/

aimsSeveral fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles are available for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition. However, there is disagreement on which type of needle has the best diagnostic yield. The aim of this study was to compare the performance and safety of two commonly used EUS-FNB needles.

methodsWe retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients who underwent EUS-FNB between June 2016 and March 2020 in our hospital. Two types of needles were evaluated: a 20-gauge Menghini needle with a lateral forward bevel and a 22-gauge Franseen needle. Rapid on-site evaluation was performed in all the cases. A multivariate analysis was performed to clarify the negative predictive factors for obtaining a histological diagnosis. Propensity score matching was performed to compare the diagnostic yields of these two needles.

resultsWe analyzed 666 patients and 690 lesions. The overall diagnostic rate of histology alone was 88.8%, and the overall adverse event rate was 1.5%. Transduodenal access and small lesions (≤2 cm) were identified as negative predictive factors for obtaining a histological diagnosis. After propensity score matching, 482 lesions were analyzed. The diagnostic accuracy rates of histology in the M and F needle groups were 89.2% and 88.8%, respectively (p=1.00).

conclusionBoth the needles showed high diagnostic yield, and no significant difference in performance was observed between the two.

Indexed as

BiopsyEndoscopic ultrasonographyEndoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration

Identifiers

PMID33657780
PMCPMC8505170

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.