Diagnostic efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided needle sampling for upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions: a meta-analysis
- PMID: 26310529
- DOI: 10.1007/s00464-015-4494-1
Diagnostic efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided needle sampling for upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions: a meta-analysis
Abstract
Background: An increasing number of studies have been conducted on the use of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided needle sampling for upper gastrointestinal subepithelial lesions (SEL). However, reported diagnostic efficacy varies greatly.
Objective: To summarize up current evidences on the diagnostic efficacy of EUS-guided needle sampling for upper GI SEL.
Method: A reproducible strategy was used to search four databases. Search results were evaluated for eligibility, and the quality of eligible studies was assessed by QUADAS-2. Pooled efficacy of EUS-guided needle sampling in upper GI SEL was calculated. Procedure-related complications, diagnostic errors, and independent factors related to a higher success rate were also recorded and analyzed.
Results: Seventeen studies, comprising 978 attempts of EUS-guided needle sampling, were included in a meta-analysis. Pooled diagnostic rate of EUS-guided needle sampling was 59.9 %, with a heterogeneity I (2) of 55.2 %. Subgroup analysis showed no difference in diagnostic rate among fine needle aspiration (FNA), trucut needle biopsy (TCB), and fine needle biopsy (FNB), or among 19-, 22-, and 25-G needles. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression suggested that the cell block method might be correlated with a higher diagnostic rate. Few severe complications were reported. Diagnosis errors were rare.
Conclusion: EUS-guided needle sampling is a safe, but only moderately effective method for pathology diagnosis of upper GI SEL. Choice of FNA/TCB/FNB, or 19 G/22 G/25 G does not seem to alter the overall diagnostic rate.
Keywords: Biopsy, needle; Diagnosis; Endosonography; Subepithelial lesion.
Similar articles
-
Comparison of FNA and fine-needle biopsy for EUS-guided sampling of suspected GI stromal tumors.Gastrointest Endosc. 2017 Sep;86(3):510-515. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2017.01.010. Epub 2017 Jan 25. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017. PMID: 28131864
-
Diagnostic yield of endoscopic and EUS-guided biopsy techniques in subepithelial lesions of the upper GI tract: a systematic review.Gastrointest Endosc. 2024 Jun;99(6):895-911.e13. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2024.02.003. Epub 2024 Feb 13. Gastrointest Endosc. 2024. PMID: 38360118
-
High clinical impact and diagnostic accuracy of EUS-guided biopsy sampling of subepithelial lesions: a prospective, comparative study.Surg Endosc. 2018 Mar;32(3):1304-1313. doi: 10.1007/s00464-017-5808-2. Epub 2017 Aug 15. Surg Endosc. 2018. PMID: 28812151 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Advantage of EUS Trucut biopsy combined with fine-needle aspiration without immediate on-site cytopathologic examination.Gastrointest Endosc. 2006 Oct;64(4):505-11. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2006.02.056. Epub 2006 Jun 6. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006. PMID: 16996340
-
Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration vs fine needle biopsy for pancreatic masses, subepithelial lesions, and lymph nodes.World J Gastroenterol. 2021 Jul 14;27(26):4194-4207. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v27.i26.4194. World J Gastroenterol. 2021. PMID: 34326619 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
What should be known prior to performing EUS exams? (Part II).Endosc Ultrasound. 2019 Nov-Dec;8(6):360-369. doi: 10.4103/eus.eus_57_19. Endosc Ultrasound. 2019. PMID: 31571619 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Endoscopic resection for esophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a multi-center feasibility study.Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2024 Jun 5;17:17562848241255304. doi: 10.1177/17562848241255304. eCollection 2024. Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2024. PMID: 38846174 Free PMC article.
-
II Brazilian consensus statement on endoscopic ultrasonography.Endosc Ultrasound. 2017 Nov-Dec;6(6):359-368. doi: 10.4103/eus.eus_32_17. Endosc Ultrasound. 2017. PMID: 29251269 Free PMC article.
-
The feasibility of endoscopic resection for esophageal gastrointestinal stromal tumor.Surg Endosc. 2025 Jun;39(6):3718-3726. doi: 10.1007/s00464-025-11763-9. Epub 2025 May 2. Surg Endosc. 2025. PMID: 40316748
-
The progression rate and risk factor analysis of small gastric subepithelial tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surg Endosc. 2025 Feb;39(2):730-740. doi: 10.1007/s00464-024-11496-1. Epub 2025 Jan 3. Surg Endosc. 2025. PMID: 39753931
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical