ArticleGE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology2023
Comparison between Two Types of 22-Gauge Fine-Needle Biopsy for Solid Pancreatic Tumors.
Article in GE Portuguese journal of gastroenterology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Minimally Invasive Sampling Techniques for Pancreatic and Pulmonary Nodules: A Review of the Evolution of Guidance and Sampling Methods.Diagnostic cytopathology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Tissue sampling using endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration is the gold standard for diagnosing malignant pancreatic tumors; however, its sensitivity and specificity are highly variable. Thus, fine-needle biopsy using cutting needles has been developed to overcome current limitations and improve diagnostic yield. Our study compared two fine-needle biopsy needles for tissue sampling for pancreatic solid lesions. Materials and Methods: Samples obtained from patients with pancreatic solid lesions using the 22-gauge fine-needle biopsy needles (Franseen needle or reverse bevel needle) were retrospectively analyzed. The primary outcomes were diagnostic yield and sample adequacy. The secondary outcome was diagnostic performance. The analysis was performed using 2 × 2 tables to calculate sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy for each needle type. Proportions were compared using the Z test. For quantitative variables, a comparative analysis was performed using Student's Results: Sixty-three patients with pancreatic lesions were included in the analysis. The fine-needle biopsy Franseen and reverse bevel groups included 33 and 30 patients, respectively. An adequate sample was obtained in 97% of patients in the Franseen needle group versus 80% in the reverse bevel needle group; the diagnostic yields in these groups were 93.9 and 66.7%, respectively. Neither differences between needle passes nor complications were noted. The sensitivity and specificity were 93.5 and 100%, respectively, in the fine-needle biopsy Franseen group, versus 71 and 100%, respectively, in the reverse bevel needle group. Conclusions: The Franseen needle was more effective for sampling pancreatic tumors than the reverse bevel needle.
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.