ArticleGastroenterology research and practice2021
Comparison of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine-Needle Aspiration and Biopsy Device for Lymphadenopathy.
Article in Gastroenterology research and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Franseen and novel tricore needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy in a porcine liver model.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- 22-gauge Co-Cr versus stainless-steel Franseen needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition in patients with solid pancreatic lesions.Clinical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Mediastinal Abscess Formation after EUS-Guided Sampling in a Young Patient with Sarcoidosis: Be Aware of the Increased Risk!GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Biopsy in the Diagnostic Work-Up of Deep-Seated Lymphadenopathies and Spleen Lesions: A Monocentric Experience.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Comparison of Fine-Needle Biopsy (FNB) versus Fine-Needle Aspiration (FNA) Combined with Flow Cytometry in the Diagnosis of Deep-Seated Lymphoma.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle biopsy vs fine-needle aspiration for lymph nodes tissue acquisition: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Gastroenterology report · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate diagnosis of benign and malignant lymphadenopathy is important for determining the appropriate treatment and prognosis. This study evaluated the diagnostic accuracy and usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) with a conventional needle compared to endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) with a Franseen needle for diagnosing lymphadenopathy.
methodsPatients who underwent EUS-FNA or EUS-FNB for mediastinal or abdominal lymphadenopathy between July 2013 and August 2020 were enrolled in the study. The outcomes between EUS-FNA patients (July 2013 to January 2017; 22-gauge conventional needle; Group A) and EUS-FNB patients (February 2017 to August 2020; 22-gauge Franseen needle; Group B) were compared.
resultsA total of 154 patients (Group A: 83; Group B: 71) were analyzed. The diagnostic accuracy (differentiating between malignant and benign lesions) was 88.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 79.2-93.3%) in Group A and 95.8% (95% CI, 88.3-98.8%) in Group B. Group B had high diagnostic accuracy, but there was no difference between the groups (
conclusionsAlthough the diagnostic accuracy between the groups was not statistically significant, EUS-FNB with a Franseen needle provided high diagnostic accuracy and required fewer passes to establish a diagnosis. Thus, EUS-FNB is useful for diagnosing lymphadenopathy.
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.