Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2007 May;65(6):788-97.
doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2006.08.028. Epub 2007 Mar 9.

Diagnostic accuracy of EUS for vascular invasion in pancreatic and periampullary cancers: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Diagnostic accuracy of EUS for vascular invasion in pancreatic and periampullary cancers: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Srinivas R Puli et al. Gastrointest Endosc. 2007 May.

Abstract

Background: Vascular invasion (VI) in a patient with pancreatic or periampullary cancers precludes surgery and indicates a poor prognosis. Published data on the accuracy of EUS in diagnosing VI is varied.

Objective: The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the accuracy of EUS in diagnosing VI in patients with pancreatic and periampullary cancers.

Design: Data from EUS studies were pooled according to the Mantel-Haenszel and DerSimonian Laird methods.

Patients: EUS studies in which VI was confirmed by surgery or angiography were selected.

Interventions: EUS.

Main outcome measures: Pooled estimates of sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, and diagnostic odds ratio of EUS.

Results: Data were extracted from 29 studies (N = 1308) that met the inclusion criteria. The pooled sensitivity of EUS in diagnosing VI was 73% (95% CI, 68.8-76.9) and the pooled specificity was 90.2% (95% CI, 87.9-92.2). The positive likelihood ratio for diagnosing VI by EUS was 9.1 (95% CI, 4.6-17.9) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.3 (95% CI, 0.2-0.5). Diagnostic odds ratio, the odds of having VI in positive as compared with negative EUS studies, was 40.1 (95% CI, 16.1-99.9). The P value for chi(2) heterogeneity for all the pooled estimates was >.05.

Conclusions: Although EUS is the best noninvasive test to diagnose VI in pancreatic and periampullary cancers, this meta-analysis showed that the specificity (90%) is high but the sensitivity (73%) is not as high as suggested. Further refinements in EUS technologies and interpretation may improve the sensitivity for detecting VI.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

MeSH terms