Cargando…
Comparison between Conventional Smear and Liquid-Based Preparation in Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology of Pancreatic Lesions
The present study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy between conventional smear (CS) and liquid-based preparation (LBP) in endoscopic ultrasonography-fine needle aspiration cytology (EUS-FNAC) of pancreatic lesions. Using 31 eligible studies, the diagnostic accuracy of cytologic examination in...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7277982/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32397572 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10050293 |
_version_ | 1783543245586825216 |
---|---|
author | Ko, Soo Hee Pyo, Jung-Soo Son, Byoung Kwan Lee, Hyo Young Oh, Il Whan Chung, Kwang Hyun |
author_facet | Ko, Soo Hee Pyo, Jung-Soo Son, Byoung Kwan Lee, Hyo Young Oh, Il Whan Chung, Kwang Hyun |
author_sort | Ko, Soo Hee |
collection | PubMed |
description | The present study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy between conventional smear (CS) and liquid-based preparation (LBP) in endoscopic ultrasonography-fine needle aspiration cytology (EUS-FNAC) of pancreatic lesions. Using 31 eligible studies, the diagnostic accuracy of cytologic examination in CS and LBP was evaluated through a conventional meta-analysis and diagnostic test accuracy review. Overall concordance rates were 82.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 79.8–85.5%) and 94.0% (95% CI, 84.4–97.8%) in CS and LBP, respectively. CS with rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) showed a higher concordance rate than CS without ROSE. In CS, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 89.8% (95% CI, 85.2–93.1%) and 95.0% (95% CI, 90.0–97.6%), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio (OR) and area under curve (AUC) of the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve were 90.32 (95% CI, 43.85–147.11) and 0.945, respectively. In LBP, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 80.9% (95% CI, 69.7–88.7%) and 99.9% (95% CI, 1.5–100.0%), respectively. The diagnostic OR and AUC of the SROC curve were 57.21 (95% CI, 23.61–138.64) and 0.939, respectively. Higher concordance rates were found in CS with ROSE and LBP in EUS-FNAC of pancreatic lesions. Regardless of the cytologic preparation method, EUS-FNAC is a useful and accurate diagnostic tool for pancreatic lesions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7277982 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-72779822020-06-12 Comparison between Conventional Smear and Liquid-Based Preparation in Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology of Pancreatic Lesions Ko, Soo Hee Pyo, Jung-Soo Son, Byoung Kwan Lee, Hyo Young Oh, Il Whan Chung, Kwang Hyun Diagnostics (Basel) Article The present study aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy between conventional smear (CS) and liquid-based preparation (LBP) in endoscopic ultrasonography-fine needle aspiration cytology (EUS-FNAC) of pancreatic lesions. Using 31 eligible studies, the diagnostic accuracy of cytologic examination in CS and LBP was evaluated through a conventional meta-analysis and diagnostic test accuracy review. Overall concordance rates were 82.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 79.8–85.5%) and 94.0% (95% CI, 84.4–97.8%) in CS and LBP, respectively. CS with rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) showed a higher concordance rate than CS without ROSE. In CS, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 89.8% (95% CI, 85.2–93.1%) and 95.0% (95% CI, 90.0–97.6%), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio (OR) and area under curve (AUC) of the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve were 90.32 (95% CI, 43.85–147.11) and 0.945, respectively. In LBP, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 80.9% (95% CI, 69.7–88.7%) and 99.9% (95% CI, 1.5–100.0%), respectively. The diagnostic OR and AUC of the SROC curve were 57.21 (95% CI, 23.61–138.64) and 0.939, respectively. Higher concordance rates were found in CS with ROSE and LBP in EUS-FNAC of pancreatic lesions. Regardless of the cytologic preparation method, EUS-FNAC is a useful and accurate diagnostic tool for pancreatic lesions. MDPI 2020-05-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7277982/ /pubmed/32397572 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10050293 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Ko, Soo Hee Pyo, Jung-Soo Son, Byoung Kwan Lee, Hyo Young Oh, Il Whan Chung, Kwang Hyun Comparison between Conventional Smear and Liquid-Based Preparation in Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology of Pancreatic Lesions |
title | Comparison between Conventional Smear and Liquid-Based Preparation in Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology of Pancreatic Lesions |
title_full | Comparison between Conventional Smear and Liquid-Based Preparation in Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology of Pancreatic Lesions |
title_fullStr | Comparison between Conventional Smear and Liquid-Based Preparation in Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology of Pancreatic Lesions |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison between Conventional Smear and Liquid-Based Preparation in Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology of Pancreatic Lesions |
title_short | Comparison between Conventional Smear and Liquid-Based Preparation in Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology of Pancreatic Lesions |
title_sort | comparison between conventional smear and liquid-based preparation in endoscopic ultrasonography-fine needle aspiration cytology of pancreatic lesions |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7277982/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32397572 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10050293 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kosoohee comparisonbetweenconventionalsmearandliquidbasedpreparationinendoscopicultrasonographyfineneedleaspirationcytologyofpancreaticlesions AT pyojungsoo comparisonbetweenconventionalsmearandliquidbasedpreparationinendoscopicultrasonographyfineneedleaspirationcytologyofpancreaticlesions AT sonbyoungkwan comparisonbetweenconventionalsmearandliquidbasedpreparationinendoscopicultrasonographyfineneedleaspirationcytologyofpancreaticlesions AT leehyoyoung comparisonbetweenconventionalsmearandliquidbasedpreparationinendoscopicultrasonographyfineneedleaspirationcytologyofpancreaticlesions AT ohilwhan comparisonbetweenconventionalsmearandliquidbasedpreparationinendoscopicultrasonographyfineneedleaspirationcytologyofpancreaticlesions AT chungkwanghyun comparisonbetweenconventionalsmearandliquidbasedpreparationinendoscopicultrasonographyfineneedleaspirationcytologyofpancreaticlesions |