ArticleUpdates in surgery2022
Performance of EUS-FNB in solid pancreatic masses: a lesson from 463 consecutive procedures and a practical nomogram.
Article in Updates in surgery, 2022. 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and pancreatic surgery in the 21st century: triumphs, turning points, and unresolved challenges.Updates in surgery · 2026Review
- A case of high grade pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor and the importance of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy technique.SAGE open medical case reports · 2025Article
- Review
- Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Update of CT-Based Radiomics Applications in the Pre-Surgical Prediction of the Risk of Post-Operative Fistula, Resectability Status and Prognosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Diagnostic Yield of Repeat Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Biopsy for Solid Pancreatic Lesions.Cancers · 2023Article
- Clinical-radiomics nomogram using contrast-enhanced CT to predict histological grade and survival in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- A morphological and immunohistochemical study of the endoscopic ultrasound-fine-needle biopsy samples from solid pancreatic masses: a single center study.Romanian journal of morphology and embryology = Revue roumaine de morphologie et embryologieArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study's main goal was the diagnostic adequacy of pancreatic endoscopic ultrasonographic (EUS) fine-needle biopsy (FNB) and associated predictive factors. The secondary objective was to define the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-FNB in the diagnosis of pancreatic masses and pancreatic malignancies. None of the studies reported the diagnostic adequacy and accuracy of EUS. We retrospectively identified patients with solid pancreatic lesions that underwent EUS-FNB between 2013, and 2018. We calculated diagnostic adequacy and related factors. Using definitive histology on the surgically resected specimen as the gold standard, we calculated diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of EUS-FNB. We identified a total of 463 procedures. Diagnostic specimens were adequate in 436 procedures (94.1%), while 27 biopsies provided insufficient samples (5.9%). The multivariate analysis showed that lesion size and needle caliper were the only factors influencing diagnostic adequacy. The use of a biopsy needle (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.30-0.1.63, P 0.400) did not improve sample adequacy. We calculated sensitivity (100%), specificity (93.2%), diagnostic accuracy (93.2%), positive predictive value (97.1%), and negative predictive value (100%) using resected specimen as the gold standard. We found no significant complications. EUS-FNB is a reliable technique for the histological characterization of solid pancreatic masses.
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.