Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42192263›Full record

SynthesisCytopathology : official journal of the British Society for Clinical Cytology2026

What Are Computer-Assisted Methods Achieving in Fine-Needle Aspiration Cytology of the Pancreas? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Al-Amaan Mohamed Mirzan, Roberto Dina

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cytopathology : official journal of the British Society for Clinical Cytology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Al-Amaan Mohamed MirzanImperial College School of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-3642-3392
Roberto DinaDepartment of Metabolism, Digestion and Reproduction, Imperial College London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivePancreatic malignancies present major diagnostic challenges. The gold standard for diagnosis is endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) with cytopathological assessment. Workforce shortages have driven interest in computer-assisted diagnosis (CAD) to improve efficiency. However, its overall diagnostic impact in pancreatic cytology remains unclear. We evaluated the accuracy of CAD in this setting.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Five databases were searched (January 2010-May 2025) for studies applying CAD to pancreatic FNA cytology. Two reviewers independently screened studies, with risk of bias assessed using QUADAS-2. Random-effects bivariate models generated pooled sensitivity, specificity, and summary receiver-operating-characteristic (SROC) curves. Studies were analysed according to the unit of analysis: image-level studies generated predictions from individual cytopathological images, whereas patient/case-level studies integrated multiple images per case to produce a single diagnostic output.

resultsTen studies met eligibility criteria and provided quantitative data. At the image-level, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 91% [95% confidence interval: 86-94] and 92% [87-96], respectively, with a SROC area under the curve (AUC) of 0.962. At the patient/case-level, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 85% [69-93] and 91% [73-97], respectively, with an SROC AUC of 0.919. Heterogeneity was high (I

conclusionCAD tools achieve near-expert accuracy for definitive diagnoses, reducing routine screening burdens and accelerating surgical planning. However, selection bias, single-centre training and inconsistent thresholds limit generalisability. Prospective multi-centre validation using whole-slide workflows is warranted, and telepathology integration could expand low-resource access. PRINT SYNOPSIS (FOR 'INSIDE THIS MONTH'S CYTOPATHOLOGY'): This systematic review and meta-analysis shows that computer-assisted diagnosis for pancreatic EUS-FNA cytology achieves high accuracy in distinguishing benign from malignant lesions, with pooled sensitivity up to 91% and specificity up to 92%. Current evidence is dominated by retrospective and curated image-level studies, highlighting the need for prospective multicentre validation using whole-slide workflows before routine clinical adoption. TWEET-LENGTH SYNOPSIS: Computer-assisted diagnosis for pancreatic EUS-FNA cytology shows promising accuracy in this systematic review and meta-analysis, but current evidence is still limited by retrospective, curated datasets. Considerable prospective multicentre validation in real-world whole-slide workflows is needed before clinical adoption.

Indexed as

CytodiagnosisDiagnosis, Computer-AssistedPancreasPancreatic NeoplasmsBiopsy, Fine-NeedleEndoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle AspirationHumansROC CurveSensitivity and Specificitycomputer‐assisted diagnosisdeep learningdiagnostic accuracyimage analysismachine learningmeta‐analysispancreatic fine‐needle aspiration cytologysystematic review

Identifiers

PMID42192263
PMCPMC13639511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.