Comparison of EUS-guided conventional smear and liquid-based cytology in pancreatic lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author:

Chandan Saurabh1,Mohan Babu P.2,Khan Shahab R.3,Ofosu Andrew4,Dhaliwal Amaninder S.5,Shah Aun R.6,Bhogal Neil6,Mashiana Harmeet S.6,Mashiana Simran S.7,Kassab Lena L.8,Ponnada Suresh9,Facciorusso Antonio10,Bhat Ishfaq6,Singh Shailender6,Witt Benjamin L.11,Adler Douglas G.2

Affiliation:

1. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, CHI Creighton University Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA

2. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA

3. Section of Gastroenterology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA

4. Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States

5. Division of Digestive Diseases & Nutrition, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida, USA

6. Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA

7. Pathology & Microbiology, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA

8. Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

9. Internal Medicine, Carilion Roanoke Memorial Hospital, Roanoke, Virginia, USA

10. Gastroenterology Unit, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Foggia, Foggia, Italy

11. Cytopathology Section, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA

Abstract

Abstract Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has limitations of inadequate sampling and false-negative results for malignancy. It has been performed using conventional smear (CS) cytology with rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) with reasonable diagnostic accuracy. An alternative to ROSE is liquid-based cytology (LBC). Commonly used LBC techniques include precipitation-based (SurePath™) and filtration-based (ThinPrep®, CellPrep®). Data regarding the diagnostic efficacy of LBC compared with CS are limited. Methods Multiple databases were searched through March 2020 to identify studies reporting diagnostic yield of EUS-guided CS and LBC in pancreatic lesions. Pooled diagnostic odds and rates of performance for the cytologic diagnoses of benign, suspicious, and malignant lesions were calculated. Diagnostic efficacy was evaluated by pooled rates of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV). Results Nine studies with a total of 1308 patients were included in our final analysis. Pooled diagnostic odds of CS cytology were 1.69 (CI 1.02–2.79) and 0.39 (CI 0.19–0.8) for malignant lesions when compared to filtration-based and precipitation-based LBC techniques, respectively. For CS, precipitation-based and filtration-based LBC, pooled diagnostic accuracy was 79.7 %, 85.2 %, 77.3 %, sensitivity was 79.2 %, 83.6 %, 68.3 %, and specificity was 99.4 %, 99.5 %, 99.5 %, respectively. Conclusions The precipitation-based LBC technique (SurePath™) had superior diagnostic odds for malignant pancreatic lesions compared with CS cytology in the absence of ROSE. It showed superior accuracy and sensitivity, but comparable specificity and PPV. Diagnostic odds of CS cytology in the absence of ROSE were superior to the filtration-based LBC technique (ThinPrep®, Cellprep®) for diagnosing malignant pancreatic lesions.

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Subject

Gastroenterology,Medicine (miscellaneous)

Reference60 articles.

1. Endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration: Technique and applications in clinical practice;B Tharian;World J Gastrointest Endosc,2012

2. Optimizing diagnostic yield for EUS-guided sampling of solid pancreatic lesions: a technical review;B R Weston;Gastroenterol Hepatol (NY),2013

3. Pancreatic solid incidentalomas;E Santo;Endosc Ultrasound,2017

4. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries;F Bray;CA Cancer J Clin,2018

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3