SynthesisJournal of ovarian research2025
The role of ultrasound-guided tru-cut biopsy in ovarian cancer: a systematic review of its safety, adequacy, and accuracy with meta-analysis of diagnostic performance.
Synthesis in Journal of ovarian research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo analyze the safety, adequacy and accuracy of ultrasound-guided tru-cut biopsy in the diagnosis of ovarian cancer.
methodsA systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus was conducted through June 2024. Studies meeting predefined criteria were included in the review. The quality of diagnostic accuracy studies was assessed using QUADAS-2. A meta-analysis was performed on studies reporting complete 2 × 2 diagnostic data.
resultsA total of 2,250 articles were initially screened, and after the removal of duplicates, 54 articles were deemed eligible for full-text assessment. Ultimately, 18 studies, comprising 1,867 patients who underwent ultrasound-guided tru-cut biopsy, were included in the systematic review. A total of 16 complications were reported across 1,898 biopsies performed in the included studies, resulting in a mean complication rate of 0.58% (95% CI: 0.187- 0.964%). Adequacy for histological and immunohistochemical examination after one attempt was reported in 16 studies, with a mean adequacy rate of 95.1% (95% CI: 92.69- 97.50%) and a median rate of 95.97%. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed in 13 studies, revealing a mean diagnostic accuracy of 95.54% (95% CI: 93.19- 97.89%) and a median of 97.48%.In the meta-analysis of 10 studies, pooled sensitivity was 98.6%, specificity 41.9%, positive predictive value (PPV) 99.0%, and negative predictive value (NPV) 47.2%, with high heterogeneity observed in specificity and NPV estimates.
conclusionsUltrasound guided tru-cut biopsy is a safe and effective diagnostic method, demonstrating a high adequacy rate for histological and immunohistochemical analysis. It shows excellent performance in confirming malignancy and supports preoperative decision making. To further define its role in the diagnostic pathway for ovarian cancer, additional prospective multicenter studies are needed-both to validate its reliability in negative cases and to ensure tissue adequacy for advanced molecular testing in the context of personalized medicine.
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.