ArticleDEN open2025
The outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition for small focal liver lesions measuring ≤2 cm.
Article in DEN open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition for Breast Cancer Liver Metastases Enables the Detection of Biomarkers Essential for Treatment.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) for focal liver lesions has gained attention as an alternative to percutaneous biopsy. Although the outcomes of EUS-TA for focal liver lesions have been reported to be favorable, no studies have focused on small focal liver lesions (≤2 cm). The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of EUS-TA for small focal liver lesions (≤2 cm). Methods: The details of EUS-TA performed for focal liver lesions between 2016 and 2022 were retrospectively reviewed. The outcomes were compared between cases involving ≤2 cm lesions and those involving >2 cm lesions. The primary outcomes were diagnostic ability and adverse events. Results: EUS-TA for focal liver lesions was performed in 109 cases. Of the 109 cases, 32 (29.3%) involved ≤2 cm lesions and 77 (70.6%) involved >2 cm lesions. Right lobe lesions and transduodenal puncture were significantly fewer in the ≤2 cm group. There were no significant differences in needle gauge, needle type, or number of punctures between the groups. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy rates were 96.8%, 100%, and 96.8%, respectively, in the ≤2 cm group and 97.4%, 100%, and 97.4%, respectively, in the >2 cm group, with no significant differences between the groups. There was no difference in adverse events between the groups (0% in the ≤2 cm group and 2.3% in the >2 cm group). Conclusions: EUS-TA for small focal liver lesions measuring ≤2 cm has favorable outcomes, which are similar to those for lesions measuring >2 cm.
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.