Cargando…

Genetic testing vs microforceps biopsy in pancreatic cysts: Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and cytology in pancreatic cystic fluid are suboptimal for evaluation of pancreatic cystic neoplasms. Genetic testing and microforceps biopsy are promising tools for pre-operative diagnostic improvement but comparative performance of both methods is unknown...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Faias, Sandra, Pereira, Luisa, Luís, Ângelo, Chaves, Paula, Cravo, Marília
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6639554/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31341368
http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v25.i26.3450
_version_ 1783436487180681216
author Faias, Sandra
Pereira, Luisa
Luís, Ângelo
Chaves, Paula
Cravo, Marília
author_facet Faias, Sandra
Pereira, Luisa
Luís, Ângelo
Chaves, Paula
Cravo, Marília
author_sort Faias, Sandra
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and cytology in pancreatic cystic fluid are suboptimal for evaluation of pancreatic cystic neoplasms. Genetic testing and microforceps biopsy are promising tools for pre-operative diagnostic improvement but comparative performance of both methods is unknown. AIM: To compare the accuracy of genetic testing and microforceps biopsy in pancreatic cysts referred for surgery. METHODS: We performed a literature search in Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science for studies evaluating genetic testing of cystic fluid and microforceps biopsy of pancreatic cysts, with endoscopic ultrasound with fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) prior to surgery and surgical pathology as reference standard for diagnosis. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy for: 1- benign cysts; 2- mucinous low-risk cysts; 3- high-risk cysts, and the diagnostic yield and rate of correctly identified cysts with microforceps biopsy and molecular analysis. We also assessed publication bias, heterogeneity, and study quality. RESULTS: Eight studies, including 1206 patients, of which 203 (17%) referred for surgery who met the inclusion criteria were analyzed in the systematic review, and seven studies were included in the meta-analysis. Genetic testing and microforceps biopsies were identical for diagnosis of benign cysts. Molecular analysis was superior for diagnosis of both low and high-risk mucinous cysts, with sensitivities of 0.89 (95%CI: 0.79-0.95) and 0.57 (95%CI: 0.42-0.71), specificities of 0.88 (95%CI: 0.75-0.95) and 0.88 (95%CI: 0.80-0.93) and AUC of 0.9555 and 0.92, respectively. The diagnostic yield was higher in microforceps biopsies than in genetic analysis (0.73 vs 0.54, respectively) but the rates of correctly identified cysts were identical (0.73 with 95%CI: 0.62-0.82 vs 0.71 with 95%CI: 0.49-0.86, respectively). CONCLUSION: Genetic testing and microforceps biopsies are useful second tests, with identical results in benign pancreatic cysts. Genetic analysis performs better for low- and high-risk cysts but has lower diagnostic yield.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6639554
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Baishideng Publishing Group Inc
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66395542019-07-24 Genetic testing vs microforceps biopsy in pancreatic cysts: Systematic review and meta-analysis Faias, Sandra Pereira, Luisa Luís, Ângelo Chaves, Paula Cravo, Marília World J Gastroenterol Meta-Analysis BACKGROUND: Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and cytology in pancreatic cystic fluid are suboptimal for evaluation of pancreatic cystic neoplasms. Genetic testing and microforceps biopsy are promising tools for pre-operative diagnostic improvement but comparative performance of both methods is unknown. AIM: To compare the accuracy of genetic testing and microforceps biopsy in pancreatic cysts referred for surgery. METHODS: We performed a literature search in Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science for studies evaluating genetic testing of cystic fluid and microforceps biopsy of pancreatic cysts, with endoscopic ultrasound with fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) prior to surgery and surgical pathology as reference standard for diagnosis. We evaluated the diagnostic accuracy for: 1- benign cysts; 2- mucinous low-risk cysts; 3- high-risk cysts, and the diagnostic yield and rate of correctly identified cysts with microforceps biopsy and molecular analysis. We also assessed publication bias, heterogeneity, and study quality. RESULTS: Eight studies, including 1206 patients, of which 203 (17%) referred for surgery who met the inclusion criteria were analyzed in the systematic review, and seven studies were included in the meta-analysis. Genetic testing and microforceps biopsies were identical for diagnosis of benign cysts. Molecular analysis was superior for diagnosis of both low and high-risk mucinous cysts, with sensitivities of 0.89 (95%CI: 0.79-0.95) and 0.57 (95%CI: 0.42-0.71), specificities of 0.88 (95%CI: 0.75-0.95) and 0.88 (95%CI: 0.80-0.93) and AUC of 0.9555 and 0.92, respectively. The diagnostic yield was higher in microforceps biopsies than in genetic analysis (0.73 vs 0.54, respectively) but the rates of correctly identified cysts were identical (0.73 with 95%CI: 0.62-0.82 vs 0.71 with 95%CI: 0.49-0.86, respectively). CONCLUSION: Genetic testing and microforceps biopsies are useful second tests, with identical results in benign pancreatic cysts. Genetic analysis performs better for low- and high-risk cysts but has lower diagnostic yield. Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2019-07-14 2019-07-14 /pmc/articles/PMC6639554/ /pubmed/31341368 http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v25.i26.3450 Text en ©The Author(s) 2019. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial.
spellingShingle Meta-Analysis
Faias, Sandra
Pereira, Luisa
Luís, Ângelo
Chaves, Paula
Cravo, Marília
Genetic testing vs microforceps biopsy in pancreatic cysts: Systematic review and meta-analysis
title Genetic testing vs microforceps biopsy in pancreatic cysts: Systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Genetic testing vs microforceps biopsy in pancreatic cysts: Systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Genetic testing vs microforceps biopsy in pancreatic cysts: Systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Genetic testing vs microforceps biopsy in pancreatic cysts: Systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Genetic testing vs microforceps biopsy in pancreatic cysts: Systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort genetic testing vs microforceps biopsy in pancreatic cysts: systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Meta-Analysis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6639554/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31341368
http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v25.i26.3450
work_keys_str_mv AT faiassandra genetictestingvsmicroforcepsbiopsyinpancreaticcystssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT pereiraluisa genetictestingvsmicroforcepsbiopsyinpancreaticcystssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT luisangelo genetictestingvsmicroforcepsbiopsyinpancreaticcystssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT chavespaula genetictestingvsmicroforcepsbiopsyinpancreaticcystssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT cravomarilia genetictestingvsmicroforcepsbiopsyinpancreaticcystssystematicreviewandmetaanalysis