Cargando…
Comparison of two different size needles in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration for diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions: A meta-analysis of prospective controlled trials
BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis aimed to provide a pooled analysis of prospective controlled trials comparing the diagnostic accuracy of 22-G and 25-G needles on endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS-FNA) of the solid pancreatic mass. METHODS: We established a rigorous study protocol according to Cochrane...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer Health
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5293419/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28151856 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000005802 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis aimed to provide a pooled analysis of prospective controlled trials comparing the diagnostic accuracy of 22-G and 25-G needles on endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS-FNA) of the solid pancreatic mass. METHODS: We established a rigorous study protocol according to Cochrane Collaboration recommendations. We systematically searched the PubMed and Embase databases to identify articles to include in the meta-analysis. Sensitivity, specificity, and corresponding 95% confidence intervals were calculated for 22-G and 25-G needles of individual studies from the contingency tables. RESULTS: Eleven prospective controlled trials included a total of 837 patients (412 with 22-G vs 425 with 25-G). Our outcomes revealed that 25-G needles (92% [95% CI, 89%–95%]) have higher sensitivity than 22-G needles (88% [95% CI, 84%–91%]) on solid pancreatic mass EUS-FNA (P = 0.046). However, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups in overall diagnostic specificity (P = 0.842). The pooled positive and negative likelihood ratio of the 22-G needle were 12.61 (95% CI, 5.65–28.14) and 0.16 (95% CI, 0.12–0.21), respectively. The pooled positive likelihood ratio was 12.61 (95% CI, 5.65–28.14), and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.16 (95% CI, 0.12–0.21) for the 22-G needle. The pooled positive likelihood ratio was 8.44 (95% CI, 3.87–18.42), and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.13 (95% CI, 0.09–0.18) for the 25-G needle. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.97 for the 22-G needle and 0.96 for the 25-G needle. CONCLUSION: Compared to the study of 22-G EUS-FNA needles, our study showed that 25-G needles have superior sensitivity in the evaluation of solid pancreatic lesions by EUS–FNA. |
---|