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
. 2015 Dec;60(12):3771-81.
doi: 10.1007/s10620-015-3831-5. Epub 2015 Sep 4.

Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Biopsy for Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Pelvic Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Biopsy for Differentiation of Benign and Malignant Pelvic Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Chaoqun Han et al. Dig Dis Sci. 2015 Dec.

Abstract

Background: Preoperative diagnosis of pelvic lesions remains challenging despite advances in imaging technologies. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided biopsy is an effective diagnostic modality for sampling the digestive tract and surrounding areas. However, a meta-analysis summarizing the diagnostic efficacy of EUS-guided biopsy for pelvic lesions has not been published.

Aims: We aimed to evaluate the utility of EUS-guided biopsy in the diagnosis of pelvic lesions.

Methods: Articles were identified via structured database search; only studies where pelvic lesions were confirmed by surgery or clinical follow-up were included. Data extracted were selected with strict criteria. A fixed-effects model was used to estimate the sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). A summary receiver operating characteristic curve (SROC) was also constructed.

Results: Ten studies containing a total of 246 patients were included. The pooled sensitivity of EUS-guided biopsy for differential diagnosis of pelvic masses was 0.89 (95% CI 0.83-0.94), and the specificity was 0.93 (95% CI 0.86-0.97). The area under the SROC was 0.9631. The combined PLR, NLR, and DOR were 11.75 (95% CI 5.90-23.43), 0.12 (95% CI 0.07-0.20), and 100.06 (95% CI 37.48-267.10) respectively. There is potential presence of publication bias in this meta-analysis.

Conclusions: Our meta-analysis shows that EUS-guided biopsy is a powerful tool for differentiating pelvic masses with a high sensitivity and specificity. Furthermore, it is a safe procedure with low rate of complication, although more high-quality prospective studies are required to be done.

Keywords: Biopsy; Endoscopic ultrasound; Meta-analysis; Pelvic lesion.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Gastrointest Endosc. 2008 May;67(6):791-8 - PubMed
    1. Pancreas. 2013 Apr;42(3):524-30 - PubMed
    1. Diagn Cytopathol. 2015 Apr;43(4):278-86 - PubMed
    1. Ann Diagn Pathol. 2013 Dec;17(6):494-7 - PubMed
    1. Endoscopy. 2005 Feb;37(2):154-60 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources