Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33885006›Full record

ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound

Macroscopic on-site evaluation after EUS-guided fine needle biopsy may replace rapid on-site evaluation.

Hoonsub So, Dong-Wan Seo, Jun Seong Hwang, Sung Woo Ko, Dongwook Oh, Tae Jun Song, Do Hyun Park, Sung Koo Lee, Myung-Hwan Kim

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Endoscopic ultrasound. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Hoonsub SoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Dong-Wan SeoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Jun Seong HwangDepartment of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Sung Woo KoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Dongwook OhDepartment of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Tae Jun SongDepartment of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Do Hyun ParkDepartment of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Sung Koo LeeDepartment of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Myung-Hwan KimDepartment of Gastroenterology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.
Ulsan College · KRUniversity of Ulsan · KRAsan Medical Center · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesRapid on-site cytologic evaluation (ROSE) increases the diagnostic yield of EUS-FNA. However, ROSE requires the presence of a cytopathologist and additional cost and time for slide staining and interpretation. Macroscopic on-site examination (MOSE) was recently introduced as an alternative to ROSE and showed high accuracy for the use in pathologic diagnosis. We evaluated the efficacy of MOSE in terms of tissue acquisition and diagnostic accuracy for abdominal lesions.

methodsWe analyzed consecutive patients included who underwent EUS-guided fine needle biopsy (FNB) between January 2019 and November 2019. All procedures were done by dry suction using a 22G needle. Obtained specimens were expelled onto filter papers and evaluated by MOSE. Needle pass was done until the acquisition of satisfactory whitish macroscopic visible core or bloody tissue granules. The primary outcomes were successful tissue acquisition and accuracy for pathologic diagnosis.

resultsIn 75 patients (male, 52%; median age: 62 years), the pancreas was the most commonly targeted organ (81.4%) and the median target diameter was 25 mm. The median number of needle passes was 2.0 (range, 2-5). Successful targeting of the lesion was achieved in 75 patients (100%) and overall accuracy was 97.3%. There were no procedure-related adverse events.

conclusionsMOSE was effective for complementing EUS-FNB by ensuring the adequate acquisition of biopsy specimens with a minimal number of needle passes while providing a critically high diagnostic accuracy. MOSE seems to be a viable alternative to ROSE in select clinical situations.

Indexed as

EUSfine needle biopsymacroscopic on-site examination

Identifiers

PMID33885006
PMCPMC8098838
OpenAlexW3152738409

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.