Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34441856›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021

Comparison of Histological Sample Volumes among Various Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biopsy Needles.

Kosuke Takahashi, Ichiro Yasuda, Tatsuyuki Hanaoka, Yuka Hayashi, Iori Motoo, Shinya Kajiura, Takayuki Ando, Haruka Fujinami, Kazuto Tajiri, Johji Imura and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kosuke TakahashiThird Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toyama, Toyama 930-0194, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-2361-5043
Ichiro YasudaThird Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toyama, Toyama 930-0194, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-6888-0310
Tatsuyuki HanaokaThird Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toyama, Toyama 930-0194, Japan.
Yuka HayashiThird Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toyama, Toyama 930-0194, Japan.
Iori MotooThird Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toyama, Toyama 930-0194, Japan.
Shinya KajiuraThird Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toyama, Toyama 930-0194, Japan.
Takayuki AndoThird Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toyama, Toyama 930-0194, Japan.
Haruka FujinamiThird Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toyama, Toyama 930-0194, Japan.
Kazuto TajiriThird Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toyama, Toyama 930-0194, Japan.
Johji ImuraDepartment of Diagnostic Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Academic Assembly, University of Toyama, Toyama 930-0194, Japan.
Eisuke OzawaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki 852-8501, Japan.
Satoshi MiumaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki 852-8501, Japan.
Hisamitsu MiyaakiDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki 852-8501, Japan.
Kazuhiko NakaoDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki 852-8501, Japan.
University of Toyama · JPNagasaki University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) enables easy and accurate pathological assessment. Here, we compared and assessed the area of samples on glass slides for three needle types: a 19-gauge Franseen needle (Acquire, Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA), a 22-gauge Franseen needle, and a 19-gauge fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needle (EZ Shot 3 Plus; Olympus, Tokyo, Japan). Among patients with suspected pancreatic cancer, with a ≥20 mm tumor located in the pancreatic body and tail, and who underwent EUS-FNA or FNB between June 2018 and March 2020, 10 were randomly selected to test each needle. The areas of histological tissue and blood clot samples were measured using the BZ-X800 imaging software (Keyence Corporation, Osaka, Japan). Baseline patient characteristics and pathological sample data showed no significant differences among the needles. The 19-gauge Franseen needle obtained significantly more histological tissue samples than the 19-gauge conventional needle (

Indexed as

19-gauge22-gaugeendoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsyFranseen needlepancreatic cancer

Identifiers

PMID34441856
PMCPMC8396954
OpenAlexW3193615153

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.