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
. 2010 Oct;55(10):2756-66.
doi: 10.1007/s10620-010-1361-8. Epub 2010 Aug 6.

Role of EUS-FNA-based cytology in the diagnosis of mucinous pancreatic cystic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Nirav Thosani  1 , Sonali Thosani, Wei Qiao, Jason B Fleming, Manoop S Bhutani, Sushovan Guha
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Role of EUS-FNA-based cytology in the diagnosis of mucinous pancreatic cystic lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Nirav Thosani et al. Dig Dis Sci. 2010 Oct.

Abstract

Background: Preoperative diagnosis of malignancy in pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs) remains challenging. Most non-mucinous cystic lesions (NMCLs) are benign, but mucinous cystic lesions (MCLs) are more likely to be premalignant or malignant.

Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios (LRs) of EUS-FNA-based cytology in differentiating MCLs from non-mucinous PCLs.

Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search of MEDLINE, SCOPUS, Cochrane, and "CINAHL Plus" databases to identify studies, in which the results of EUS-FNA-based cytology of PCLs were compared with those of surgical biopsy or surgical excision histopathology. A DerSimonian-Laird random effect model was used to estimate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and LRs, and a summary receiver-operating characteristic (SROC) curve was constructed.

Results: We included 376 patients from 11 distinct studies who underwent EUS-FNA-based cytology and also had histopathological diagnosis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing MCLs were 0.63 (95% CI, 0.56-0.70) and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.83-0.93), respectively. The positive and negative LRs in diagnosing MCLs were 4.46 (95% CI, 1.21-16.43) and 0.46 (95% CI, 0.25-0.86), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.89.

Conclusions: EUS-FNA-based cytology has overall low sensitivity but good specificity in differentiating MCLs from NMCLs. Further research is required to improve the overall sensitivity of EUS-FNA-based cytology to diagnose MCLs while evaluating PCL.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram of study selection process for the Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Figure 2
Figure 2
Pooled sensitivity and specificity. The size of each round is proportional to the sample size for each study, and the horizontal lines through the rounds indicate a graphical representation of the 95% CI of that study. For the combined analysis, the diamond and vertical dashed bar indicates the pooled sensitivity or specificity, with the left and right ends of the vertical bar indicating the pooled 95% CI.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios. The size of each round is proportional to the sample size for each study, and the horizontal lines through the rounds indicate a graphical representation of the 95% CI of that study. For the combined analysis, the diamond and vertical dashed bar indicates the pooled positive or negative likelihood ratio, with the left and right ends of the vertical bar indicating the pooled 95% CI.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Pooled sensitivity and specificity for all prospective studies. The size of each round is proportional to the sample size for each study, and the horizontal lines through the rounds indicate a graphical representation of the 95% CI of that study. For the combined analysis, the diamond and vertical dashed bar indicates the pooled sensitivity or specificity, with the left and right ends of the vertical bar indicating the pooled 95% CI.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Pooled positive and negative likelihood ratios for all prospective studies. The size of each round is proportional to the sample size for each study, and the horizontal lines through the rounds indicate a graphical representation of the 95% CI of that study. For the combined analysis, the diamond and vertical dashed bar indicates the pooled positive or negative likelihood ratio, with the left and right ends of the vertical bar indicating the pooled 95% CI.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Summary Receiver Operating Characteristic (SROC) Curve for all 11 studies of meta-analysis and SROC Curve for 4 prospective studies
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Box JC, Douglas HO. Management of cystic neoplasms of the pancreas. Am Surg. 2000;66(5):495–501. - PubMed
    1. Fernandez-del Castillo C, Warshaw AL. Cystic tumors of the pancreas. Surg Clin North Am. 1995;75(5):1001–16. - PubMed
    1. Warshaw AL, Compton CC, Lewandrowski K, et al. Cystic tumors of the pancreas. New clinical, radiologic, and pathologic observations in 67 patients. Ann Surg. 1990;212(4):432, 43. discussion 444–5. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Warshaw AL, Rutledge PL. Cystic tumors mistaken for pancreatic pseudocysts. Ann Surg. 1987;205(4):393–8. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Steinberg W, Tenner S. Acute pancreatitis. N Engl J Med. 1994;330(17):1198–210. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms