SynthesisPloS one2025
Diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration-based cytology for distinguishing malignant and benign pancreatic cystic lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Peroral Pancreatoscopy for Differentiating Main Duct IPMN from Chronic Pancreatitis: A Narrative Review and a Case Series.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- EUS-Anchored Multimodal Evaluation of Pancreatic Cystic Lesions: Toward a Conceptual Diagnostic Framework.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Endoscopic management of pancreatic cystic neoplasms.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Review
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
backgroundPreoperative diagnosis of malignancy in patients with pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) remains challenging. The aim of this study was to assess the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios (LRs) of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA)-based cytology in differentiating malignant PCLs from benign PCLs.
methodsA comprehensive search was performed in multiple databases in November 2023. Studies differentiating benign and malignant PCLs via EUS-FNA-based cytology, in which the results were compared with those of surgical excision histopathology, were included in this meta-analysis. Data from the selected studies were pooled to summarize the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative LRs, diagnostic odds ratios and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves.
resultsWe included 755 patients from 15 distinct studies who underwent EUS-FNA-based cytology and had a histopathological diagnosis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing malignant PCLs were 0.62 (95% CI, 0.42-0.78) and 0.96 (95% CI, 0.91-0.98), respectively. The positive and negative LRs for diagnosing malignant PCLs were 16.3 (95% CI, 7.2-37.0) and 0.40 (95% CI, 0.25-0.64), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.94 (95% CI, 0.91-0.95).
conclusionsEUS-FNA-based cytology has overall high specificity, medium sensitivity and good diagnostic accuracy in differentiating malignant from benign PCLs. Further research is needed to improve the overall sensitivity of EUS-FNA-based cytology for the diagnosis of malignant PCLs.
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.