ArticleBMC gastroenterology2025
Safety of early feeding after endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) is a widely utilized and relatively safe procedure for diagnosing pancreatic diseases. Although early feeding post-EUS-FNB is clinically advantageous, consensus regarding the optimal feeding time in current guidelines remains lacking. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of early feeding after EUS-FNB.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 111 patients who underwent EUS-FNB for diagnosing pancreatic diseases between January 1, 2021, and March 31, 2022, at Samsung Changwon Hospital. Patients were divided into two groups: those who fed within 4 h after the procedure and those who remained fasting for 24 h after the procedure. We investigated two hospitalization duration metrics: procedure-related hospital days (HD), defined as the period exclusively attributed to EUS-FNB recovery, and total HD, encompassing the entire hospitalization duration, including additional diagnostic or therapeutic interventions unrelated to the procedure.
resultsAfter excluding missing data, 110 patients were analyzed. Among them, the mean age was 67.4 years, with 52.7% being male. Of these, 42 patients resumed early feeding. No significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of complications. However, the procedure-related HD was shorter in the early feeding group (3.8 ± 0.8 vs. 4.9 ± 0.7 days, P = 0.001). Additionally, the multivariate analysis revealed no difference in complication rates between the two groups (odds ratio; 0.83, 95% confidence interval; 0.07-9.39, P = 0.877).
conclusionsEarly feeding following EUS-FNB was associated with a shorter hospitalization stay without increasing the risk of complications. These findings suggest that early feeding after EUS-FNB offers clinical benefits.
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.