ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound
EUS-guided biopsy
Article in Endoscopic ultrasound. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Structured training program on confocal laser endomicroscopy for pancreatic cystic lesions: a multicenter prospective study among early-career endosonographers (with video).Gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2023Trial
- Role of Endoscopic Ultrasonography in Management of Pancreaticobiliary Cancers: Recent Trends and Advances.Cancers · 2026Review
- Pancreatic Cystic Lesions and Endoscopic Ultrasound Diagnostic Equipment: A Literature Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Real-time guidance of lauromacrogol ablation for pancreatic cystic lesions using confocal laser endomicroscopy.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Through-the-Needle Biopsy Revisited: How Patient Selection and Standardization Reduce Adverse Events in Pancreatic Cyst Evaluation.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Cystic tumors of the pancreas: Current perspectives on diagnosis and management.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Histologic Diagnosis of Pancreatic Cystic Lesions with Endoscopic Ultrasound Fine Needle Biopsy and Impact on Management Decisions.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Article
- Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatic Tissue Sampling: Lesion Assessment, Needles, and Techniques.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Through-the-Needle Biopsy: A Narrative Review of the Technique and Its Emerging Role in Pancreatic Cyst Diagnosis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Basic Principles and Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in Diagnosis and Differentiation of Pancreatic Cancer from Other Pancreatic Lesions: A Comprehensive Review of Endoscopic Ultrasound for Pancreatic Cancer.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Rare Pancreatic/Peripancreatic Cystic Lesions Can Be Accurately Characterized by EUS with Through-the-Needle Biopsy-A Unique Pictorial Essay with Clinical and Histopathological Correlations.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- EUS-guided through the needle microbiopsy: a useful adjunct in the investigation of pancreatic cystic lesions.BMJ open gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound in the Evaluation of Pancreatic Cystic Neoplasms: A Concise Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Application of Artificial Intelligence in the Management of Pancreatic Cystic Lesions.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Factors affecting the diagnostic value of liquid-based cytology by EUS-FNA in the diagnosis of pancreatic cystic neoplasms.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesPancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) are frequent incidental findings on cross-sectional imaging and represent a diagnostic challenge as different kinds of PCLs harbor a dissimilar risk of malignancy. Two diagnostic tools have recently been developed and introduced: through-the-needle biopsy (TTNB) and needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy (nCLE). The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the diagnostic yield and performance, as well as the safety profile of the two methods.
methodsThis meta-analysis was performed in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies with five or more patients undergoing either endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-TTNB or EUS-nCLE for a PCL. Reviews, case reports, editorials, conference abstracts, and studies on exclusively solid pancreatic lesions were excluded. Outcomes of interest were diagnostic yield and performance, safety, and technical success.
resultsTwenty studies with 1023 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled diagnostic yield of EUS-nCLE was higher compared to EUS-TTNB (85% vs. 74%, P < 0.0001), while diagnostic performance was high and comparable for both methods (pooled sensitivity: 80% vs. 86% and pooled specificity: 80% vs. 83% for TTNB and nCLE, respectively, P > 0.05). Pooled estimate of total adverse event (AE) rate was 5% in the TTNB group and 3% in the nCLE group, P = 0.302. Technical success rates were high and comparable (94% and 99% for EUS-TTNB and nCLE, respectively; P = 0.07).
conclusionEUS-TTNB and EUS-nCLE have a similar safety profile with a relatively low number of AEs. Technical success, sensitivity, and specificity are comparable; however, EUS-nCLE seems to have a slightly higher diagnostic yield.
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.