{"title":"Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Acquisition for Evaluation of Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors: A Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Xiaohua Ye, Hongjun Hua, Chunxiao Hu, Jianying Dai, Chenjiao Wu, Jiaping Huai, Zhe Shen","doi":"10.1097/MCG.0000000000002070","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the diagnostic performance of EUS-FNA/B in patients with panNETs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a computerized search of the MEDLINE and Embase databases to identify relevant articles. The primary outcomes involved grading concordance rate, diagnostic rate, and correlation coefficient (Cohen's κ) for FNA/B samples compared with surgical specimens. Secondary outcomes included sample adequacy, mean number of passes, and adverse events.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forty-five studies involving 2978 patients were finally included. The pooled concordance rate between EUS-FNA/B and surgical grading was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.73-0.80; I2=48.2%). A significantly higher level of concordance was observed in G1 subgroup (0.88, 95% CI: 0.84-0.91), whereas the G2 subgroup revealed the lowest level of agreement (0.59, 95% CI: 0.52-0.65; P < 0.001). Pooled diagnostic rate for FNA/B sampling was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.79-0.86; I2=63.3%). In addition, FNB outperformed FNA in terms of sample adequacy (0.93 for FNB vs. 0.81 for FNA; P=0.007) and number of needle passes required (2.53 for FNB vs. 3.32 for FNA; P=0.013). Moreover, the overall level of agreement for grading was moderate (κ=0.59, 95% CI: 0.49-0.68; I2=84.5%). There were a limited number of adverse events that had minor influence on patient outcomes (0.03, 95% CI: 0.02-0.05; I2=19.2%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>EUS-FNA/B is a reliable approach for the diagnosis and preoperative grading of panNET, with FNB demonstrating superior performance compared with FNA.</p>","PeriodicalId":15457,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical gastroenterology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical gastroenterology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCG.0000000000002070","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aims: The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the diagnostic performance of EUS-FNA/B in patients with panNETs.
Methods: We conducted a computerized search of the MEDLINE and Embase databases to identify relevant articles. The primary outcomes involved grading concordance rate, diagnostic rate, and correlation coefficient (Cohen's κ) for FNA/B samples compared with surgical specimens. Secondary outcomes included sample adequacy, mean number of passes, and adverse events.
Results: Forty-five studies involving 2978 patients were finally included. The pooled concordance rate between EUS-FNA/B and surgical grading was 0.77 (95% CI: 0.73-0.80; I2=48.2%). A significantly higher level of concordance was observed in G1 subgroup (0.88, 95% CI: 0.84-0.91), whereas the G2 subgroup revealed the lowest level of agreement (0.59, 95% CI: 0.52-0.65; P < 0.001). Pooled diagnostic rate for FNA/B sampling was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.79-0.86; I2=63.3%). In addition, FNB outperformed FNA in terms of sample adequacy (0.93 for FNB vs. 0.81 for FNA; P=0.007) and number of needle passes required (2.53 for FNB vs. 3.32 for FNA; P=0.013). Moreover, the overall level of agreement for grading was moderate (κ=0.59, 95% CI: 0.49-0.68; I2=84.5%). There were a limited number of adverse events that had minor influence on patient outcomes (0.03, 95% CI: 0.02-0.05; I2=19.2%).
Conclusions: EUS-FNA/B is a reliable approach for the diagnosis and preoperative grading of panNET, with FNB demonstrating superior performance compared with FNA.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Clinical Gastroenterology gathers the world''s latest, most relevant clinical studies and reviews, case reports, and technical expertise in a single source. Regular features include cutting-edge, peer-reviewed articles and clinical reviews that put the latest research and development into the context of your practice. Also included are biographies, focused organ reviews, practice management, and therapeutic recommendations.