A Meta-analysis of Slow Pull versus Suction for Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition
2
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Background/Aims: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition is widely utilized as a diagnostic modality for intra-abdominal masses, but there remains debate regarding which suction technique, slow pull (SP) or conventional suction (CS), is better. A meta-analysis of reported studies was conducted to compare the diagnostic yields of SP and CS during EUS-guided tissue acquisition. Methods: We conducted a systematic electronic search using MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify clinical studies comparing SP and CS. We meta-analyzed accuracy, sensitivity, blood contamination and cellularity using the random-effects model. Results: A total of 17 studies (seven randomized controlled trials, four prospective studies, and six retrospective studies) with 1,616 cases were included in the analysis. Compared to CS, there was a trend toward better accuracy (odds ratio [OR], 1.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97 to 2.27; p=0.07) and sensitivity (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 0.95 to 2.93; p=0.08) with SP and a significantly lower rate of blood contamination (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.69; p<0.01). However, there was no significant difference in cellularity between SP and CS, with an OR of 1.28 (95% CI, 0.68 to 2.40; p=0.45). When the use of a 25-gauge needle was analyzed, the accuracy and sensitivity of SP were significantly better than those of CS, with ORs of 4.81 (95% CI, 1.99 to 11.62; p<0.01) and 4.69 (95% CI, 1.93 to 11.40; p<0.01), respectively. Conclusions: Compared to CS, SP appears to provide better accuracy and sensitivity in EUSguided tissue acquisition, especially when a 25-gauge needle is used.
Abstract
Background/Aims: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition is widely utilized as a diagnostic modality for intra-abdominal masses, but there remains debate regarding which suction technique, slow pull (SP) or conventional suction (CS), is better. A meta-analysis of reported studies was conducted to compare the diagnostic yields of SP and CS during EUS-guided tissue acquisition. Methods: We conducted a systematic electronic search using MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify clinical studies comparing SP and CS. We meta-analyzed accuracy, sensitivity, blood contamination and cellularity using the random-effects model. Results: A total of 17 studies (seven randomized controlled trials, four prospective studies, and six retrospective studies) with 1,616 cases were included in the analysis. Compared to CS, there was a trend toward better accuracy (odds ratio [OR], 1.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97 to 2.27; p=0.07) and sensitivity (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 0.95 to 2.93; p=0.08) with SP and a significantly lower rate of blood contamination (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.69; p<0.01). However, there was no significant difference in cellularity between SP and CS, with an OR of 1.28 (95% CI, 0.68 to 2.40; p=0.45). When the use of a 25-gauge needle was analyzed, the accuracy and sensitivity of SP were significantly better than those of CS, with ORs of 4.81 (95% CI, 1.99 to 11.62; p<0.01) and 4.69 (95% CI, 1.93 to 11.40; p<0.01), respectively. Conclusions: Compared to CS, SP appears to provide better accuracy and sensitivity in EUSguided tissue acquisition, especially when a 25-gauge needle is used.
참고문헌 (40)
- Vilmann P, "Endoscopic ultrasonography with guided fine needle aspiration biopsy in pancreatic disease", Gastrointest Endosc, 38, pp.172~173 (1992)
- Chang KJ, "Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration of pancreatic carcinoma", Am J Gastroenterol, 89, pp.263~266 (1994)
- Hewitt MJ, "EUS-guided FNA for diagnosis of solid pancreatic neoplasms : a meta-analysis", Gastrointest Endosc, 75, pp.319~331 (2012)
- Varadarajulu S, "Best practices in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration", Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 10, pp.697~703 (2012)
- Bang JY, "In memoriam : fine-needle aspiration, birth. Fine-needle biopsy : the changing trend in endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition", Dig Endosc, 31, pp.197~202 (2019)
- Kandel P, "Recent advancement in EUS-guided fine needle sampling", J Gastroenterol, 54, pp.377~387 (2019)
- Wani S, "Basic techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration : role of a stylet and suction", Endosc Ultrasound, 3, pp.17~21 (2014)
- Nakai Y, "Slow pull versus suction in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid masses", Dig Dis Sci, 59, pp.1578~1585 (2014)
- Iwashita T, "High single-pass diagnostic yield of a new 25-gauge core biopsy needle for EUS-guided FNA biopsy in solid pancreatic lesions", Gastrointest Endosc, 77, pp.909~915 (2013)
- Attam R, ""Wet suction technique(WEST)" : a novel way to enhance the quality of EUS-FNA aspirate. Results of a prospective, single-blind, randomized, controlled trial using a 22-gauge needle for EUS-FNA of solid lesions", Gastrointest Endosc, 81, pp.1401~1407 (2015)
- Gerke H, "Randomized study comparing endoscopic ultrasound-guided Trucut biopsy and fine needle aspiration with high suction", Cytopathology, 21, pp.44~51 (2010)
- Wani S, "A comparative study of endoscopic ultrasound guided fine needle aspiration with and without a stylet", Dig Dis Sci, 56, pp.2409~2414 (2011)
- Higgins JP, "The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials", BMJ, 343, pp.d5928~ (2011)
- "The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses" (2000)[URL]
- DerSimonian R, "Meta-analysis in clinical trials", Control Clin Trials, 7, pp.177~188 (1986)
- Higgins JP, "Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis", Stat Med, 21, pp.1539~1558 (2002)
- Paul SR, "Small sample performance of tests of homogeneity of odds ratios in K 2 x 2 tables", Stat Med, 11, pp.159~165 (1992)
- Higgins JP, "Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses", BMJ, 327, pp.557~560 (2003)
- Begg CB, "Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias", Biometrics, 50, pp.1088~1101 (1994)
- Egger M, "Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test", BMJ, 315, pp.629~634 (1997)
- Bansal RK, "Comparison of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration by capillary action, suction, and no suction methods : a randomized blinded study", Endosc Int Open, 5, pp.E980~ (2017)
- Weston BR, "Prospective randomized comparison of a 22G core needle using standard versus capillary suction for EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic masses", Endosc Int Open, 5, pp.E505~ (2017)
- Jae Min Lee, "Slow-Pull Using a Fanning Technique Is More Useful Than the Standard Suction Technique in EUS-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration in Pancreatic Masses", Gut and Liver, 12(3), pp.360~366 (2018), 거트앤리버 소화기연관학회협의회
- Saxena P, "Stylet slow-pull versus standard suction for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fineneedle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions : a multicenter randomized trial", Endoscopy, 50, pp.497~504 (2018)
- Lee KY, "Efficacy of 3 fine-needle biopsy techniques for suspected pancreatic malignancies in the absence of an on-site cytopathologist", Gastrointest Endosc, 89, pp.825~831 (2019)
- Cheng S, "Suction versus slow-pull for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic tumors: a prospective randomized trial", HPB(Oxford), 22, pp.779~786 (2020)
- Di Mitri R, "Stylet slow-pull vs. standard suction technique for endoscopic ultrasoundguided fine needle biopsy in pancreatic solid lesions using 20Gauge Procore™ needle : a multicenter randomized trial", Dig Liver Dis, 52, pp.178~184 (2020)
- Goong HJ, "Comparison of slow-pull versus suction technique for histological diagnosis in EUSguided fine needle biopsy of solid pancreatic masses", Gastrointest Endosc, 81, pp.AB546~ (2015)
- Kin T, "Diagnostic ability of EUSFNA for pancreatic solid lesions with conventional 22-gauge needle using the slow pull technique: a prospective study", Scand J Gastroenterol, 50, pp.900~907 (2015)
- Yamakita K, "A comparative study of suction methods during endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (conventional suction versus capillary suction)", United European Gastroenterol J, 5, pp.A246~A247 (2017)
- Bor R, "Prospective comparison of slow-pull and standard suction techniques of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic cancer", BMC Gastroenterol, 19, pp.6~ (2019)
- Iwashita T, "Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration and biopsy(EUS-FNAB)using a novel 25-gauge core biopsy needle : optimizing the yield of both cytology and histology", Gastrointest Endosc, 75, pp.AB183~ (2012)
- Chen JY, "Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasoundguided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles", World J Gastroenterol, 22, pp.8790~8797 (2016)
- El Haddad R, "The slow-pull capillary technique increases the quality of endoscopic ultrasound fine needle biopsy samples in solid pancreatic lesions", Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol, 28, pp.911~916 (2016)
- Wang R, "Diagnostic accuracies of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration with distinct negative pressure suction techniques in solid lesions : a retrospective study", Oncol Lett, 13, pp.3709~3716 (2017)
- Yang L, "Analysis of the diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle aspiration in patients with a suspected pancreatic malignancy", Rev Esp Enferm Dig, 110, pp.544~550 (2018)
- Chen AM, "Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration versus fine-needle capillary sampling biopsy of pancreatic solid lesions: does technique matter?", Gastrointest Endosc, 73, pp.AB331~ (2011)
- Katanuma A, "Bench-top testing of suction forces generated through endoscopic ultrasoundguided aspiration needles", J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci, 22, pp.379~385 (2015)
- Yamabe A, "An experimental study to assess the best maneuver when using a reverse sidebevel histology needle for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy", Endosc Int Open, 4, pp.E56~ (2016)
- Kudo T, "High and low negative pressure suction techniques in EUS-guided fine-needle tissue acquisition by using 25-gauge needles : a multicenter, prospective, randomized, controlled trial", Gastrointest Endosc, 80, pp.1030~1037 (2014)