ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound
Diagnostic performance of EUS-guided tissue acquisition for solid pancreatic lesions ≤10 mm.
Article in Endoscopic ultrasound. 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.
- The Gastrointestinal Tract: A Unique Battlefield for Bioengineering Delivery Platforms.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- The plakin family: Potential therapeutic targets for digestive system tumors.Journal of translational internal medicine · 2025Article
- Diagnostic value of endoscopic ultrasound in staging of pancreatic cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Review
- Diagnosing high-grade pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia in surgically altered anatomy using pancreatic juice cytology.VideoGIE : an official video journal of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · 2025Article
- Needle tip insertion technique for accurate and safe puncture in endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition.Endoscopy · 2024Article
- Diagnostic value of EUS-guided tissue acquisition in suspected autoimmune pancreatitis: A 15-year single-center retrospective study.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
- Transesophageal EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy for the diagnosis of primary prevertebral spinal carcinosarcoma (with video).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
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: EUS tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) is the standard diagnostic method for solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs); however, there are few reports on EUS-TA results for SPLs ≤10 mm. Furthermore, given the recent advent of fine-needle biopsy, the current diagnostic accuracy of EUS-TA for SPLs ≤10 mm is unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and efficacy of EUS-TA for SPLs ≤10 mm. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of 109 patients with SPLs ≤10 mm who underwent EUS-TA. All patients underwent rapid on-site specimen evaluation. Results: The median tumor diameter was 8 mm (range, 2.5-10 mm), and the technical success rate was 99.1% (108/109). Adverse events were observed in 3 patients (2.8%). The diagnostic performance was as follows: sensitivity, 90.1% (64/71); specificity, 97.3% (36/37); accuracy, 92.6% (100/108); positive predictive value, 98.5% (64/65); and negative predictive value, 83.7% (36/43). Multivariate analysis revealed that the number of punctures (odds ratio, 7.03; 95% confidence interval, 1.32-37.5; Conclusions: EUS-TA for SPLs ≤10 mm showed adequate diagnostic accuracy and was safe for use with rapid on-site specimen evaluation in all cases.
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.