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
. 2025 Jul 29;18(1):166.
doi: 10.1186/s13048-025-01739-7.

The role of ultrasound-guided tru-cut biopsy in ovarian cancer: a systematic review of its safety, adequacy, and accuracy with meta-analysis of diagnostic performance

Munachiso Iheme Ndukwe  1   2 , Matteo Pavone  3   4 , Dominik Habes  5 , Nicolo Bizzarri  4 , Martin Stepan  1 , Petra Bretová  1 , Floriana Mascilini  4 , Dominik Karasek  1 , Denisa Pohankova  2 , Akaninyene Ubom  6 , Jana Marie Havigerova  7 , Jiri Haviger  8 , Igor Sirak  2
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

The role of ultrasound-guided tru-cut biopsy in ovarian cancer: a systematic review of its safety, adequacy, and accuracy with meta-analysis of diagnostic performance

Munachiso Iheme Ndukwe et al. J Ovarian Res. .

Abstract

Objectives: To analyze the safety, adequacy and accuracy of ultrasound-guided tru-cut biopsy in the diagnosis of ovarian cancer.

Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus was conducted through June 2024. Studies meeting predefined criteria were included in the review. The quality of diagnostic accuracy studies was assessed using QUADAS-2. A meta-analysis was performed on studies reporting complete 2 × 2 diagnostic data.

Results: A total of 2,250 articles were initially screened, and after the removal of duplicates, 54 articles were deemed eligible for full-text assessment. Ultimately, 18 studies, comprising 1,867 patients who underwent ultrasound-guided tru-cut biopsy, were included in the systematic review. A total of 16 complications were reported across 1,898 biopsies performed in the included studies, resulting in a mean complication rate of 0.58% (95% CI: 0.187- 0.964%). Adequacy for histological and immunohistochemical examination after one attempt was reported in 16 studies, with a mean adequacy rate of 95.1% (95% CI: 92.69- 97.50%) and a median rate of 95.97%. Diagnostic accuracy was assessed in 13 studies, revealing a mean diagnostic accuracy of 95.54% (95% CI: 93.19- 97.89%) and a median of 97.48%.In the meta-analysis of 10 studies, pooled sensitivity was 98.6%, specificity 41.9%, positive predictive value (PPV) 99.0%, and negative predictive value (NPV) 47.2%, with high heterogeneity observed in specificity and NPV estimates.

Conclusions: Ultrasound guided tru-cut biopsy is a safe and effective diagnostic method, demonstrating a high adequacy rate for histological and immunohistochemical analysis. It shows excellent performance in confirming malignancy and supports preoperative decision making. To further define its role in the diagnostic pathway for ovarian cancer, additional prospective multicenter studies are needed-both to validate its reliability in negative cases and to ensure tissue adequacy for advanced molecular testing in the context of personalized medicine.

Keywords: Core needle biopsy; Ovarian cancer; Systematic review; Tru-cut biopsy; Ultrasound.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flowchart summarizing inclusion of studies in systematic review
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
QUADAS-2 graph analysis
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Forest plot of sensitivity
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Forest plot of specificity
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Forest plot of positive predictive value
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Forest plot of negative predictive value
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Rojas V, Hirshfield KM, Ganesan S, Rodriguez-Rodriguez L. Molecular characterization of epithelial ovarian cancer: implications for diagnosis and treatment. Int J Mol Sci. 2016;17(12):2113. 10.3390/ijms17122113 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL et al. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA: A Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209–249. 10.3322/caac.21660 - PubMed
    1. Chandra A, Pius C, Nabeel M, et al. Ovarian cancer: current status and strategies for improving therapeutic outcomes. Cancer Med. 2019;8(16):7018–31. 10.1002/cam4.2560 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kehoe S, Hook J, Nankivell M, et al. Primary chemotherapy versus primary surgery for newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer (CHORUS): an open-label, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2015;386(9990):249–57. 10.1016/s0140-6736(14)62223-6 - PubMed
    1. Fagotti A, Ferrandina MG, Vizzielli G, et al. Randomized trial of primary debulking surgery versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (SCORPION-NCT01461850). Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2020;30(11):1657–64. 10.1136/ijgc-2020-001640 - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources