Comparison of EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB for diagnosis of solid pancreatic mass lesions: a meta-analysis of prospective studies

Dun-Wei Yao,Min-Zhen Qin,Hai-Xing Jiang,Shan-Yu Qin
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00365521.2024.2354908
2024-05-22
Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology
Abstract:Objective: To quantitatively compare the diagnostic value of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) in solid pancreatic mass lesions using a systematic evaluation method. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted on public databases to include studies comparing the diagnostic value of EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB in solid pancreatic mass lesions. The combined effect size was estimated using mean difference (MD) and risk difference (RD) respectively, and the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated. Results: The 12 articles (7 RCTs and 5 cohort studies) met the inclusion criteria of this study. The meta-analysis showed that compared with EUS-FNB, EUS-FNA had lower diagnostic accuracy (RD: −0.08, 95% CI: −0.15, −0.01) and specimen adequacy (RD: −0.08, 95% CI: −0.15, −0.02), while higher required number of needle passes (MD: 0.42, 95% CI: 0.12, 0.73). However, EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA presented similar overall complications (RD: 0.00, 95% CI: −0.01, 0.02) and technical failures (RD: −0.01, 95% CI: −0.02, 0.00), without statistically significant differences. Conclusions: Compared with EUS-FNA, EUS-FNB seems to be a better choice for diagnosing suspected pancreatic lesions.
gastroenterology & hepatology
What problem does this paper attempt to address?