ArticleDigestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society2024
Repeated endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy of solid pancreatic lesions after previous nondiagnostic or inconclusive sampling.
Article in Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Definite Step Toward Clinical Implementation of AI-Assisted Rapid On-Site Evaluation During EUS-TA.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2026Article
- Clinical significance and efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition for para-aortic lymph node metastasis.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2025Article
- Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatic Tissue Sampling: Lesion Assessment, Needles, and Techniques.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Mcl-1 expression is a predictive marker of response to gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel for metastatic pancreatic cancer.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Advances and efficacy in specimen handling for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration and biopsy: A comprehensive review.DEN open · 2024Review
- EUS-FNA versus EUS-FNB in Pancreatic Solid Lesions ≤ 15 mm.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Needle tracking and segmentation in breast ultrasound imaging based on spatio-temporal memory network.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Risk factors and a prediction model for false-negative diagnosis in repeat EUS-FNA/B of pancreatic solid lesions following initially nondiagnostic or inconclusive findings.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
30 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesRepeated endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition represents the standard practice for solid pancreatic lesions after previous nondiagnostic or inconclusive results. Since data are lacking, we aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of repeated EUS fine-needle biopsy (rEUS-FNB) in this setting. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy; sample adequacy, sensitivity, specificity, and safety were secondary outcomes.
methodsConsecutive patients undergoing rEUS-FNB for solid pancreatic lesions at 23 Italian centers from 2019 to 2021 were retrieved. Pathology on the surgical specimen, malignant histology together with ≥6-month follow-up, and benign pathology together with ≥12-month follow-up were adopted as gold standards.
resultsAmong 462 patients, 56.5% were male, with a median age of 68 (59-75) years, malignancy prevalence 77.0%. Tumor size was 26 (20-35) mm. Second-generation FNB needles were used in 89.6% cases. Diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of rEUS-FNB were 89.2%, 91.4%, and 81.7%, respectively (19 false-negative and 12 false-positive results). On multivariate analysis, rEUS-FNB performed at high-volume centers (odds ratio [OR] 2.12; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-3.17; P = 0.03) and tumor size (OR 1.03; 95% CI 1.00-1.06; P = 0.05) were independently related to diagnostic accuracy. Sample adequacy was 94.2%. Use of second-generation FNB needles (OR 5.42; 95% CI 2.30-12.77; P < 0.001) and tumor size >23 mm (OR 3.04; 95% CI 1.31-7.06; P = 0.009) were independently related to sample adequacy.
conclusionRepeated EUS-FNB allowed optimal diagnostic performance after nondiagnostic or inconclusive results. Patients' referral to high-volume centers improved diagnostic accuracy. The use of second-generation FNB needles significantly improved sample adequacy over standard EUS-FNB needles.
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.