Publication:
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided parenchymal liver biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Placeholder

Departments

Organizational Unit

School / College / Institute

Organizational Unit
SCHOOL OF MEDICINE
Upper Org Unit

Program

KU-Authors

KU Authors

Co-Authors

Kale, Santosh
Patil, Prithvi
Kannadath, Bijun
Ramireddy, Srinivas
Badillo, Ricardo
DaVee, Roy Tomas
Thosani, Nirav

Publication Date

Language

Type

Embargo Status

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Alternative Title

Abstract

Background Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS)-guided liver biopsy is a novel technique to obtain adequate liver samples for diagnosis of liver parenchymal diseases. There are studies that have evaluated the feasibility and safety of EUS-guided parenchymal liver biopsy (EUS-LB), however, factors that can influence specimen quality are yet to be determined. Our aim was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-LB and evaluate factors associated with specimen quality. Methods We performed a detailed search of PubMed/MEDLINE and Web of Science (TM) databases to identify studies in which results of EUS-guided liver parenchymal biopsies were reported published up to July 2020. A random effects model was used to estimate pooled values (mean +/- SE) for total specimen length (TSL) and complete portal tracts (CPT). Subgroup analyses were applied to find out the procedural factors associated with better specimen quality using Cochran'sQtest. A total of 10 meta-analyses were done focusing on international studies. Total of 1326 patients who underwent EUS-LB. EUS-LBs performed for suspicion of parenchymal liver disease. Pooled mean values for TSL and CPT with subgroup analyses. Results Twenty-three studies with a total of 1326 patients were included in our meta-analysis. Overall pooled mean TSL and CPT were 45.3 +/- 4.6 mm and 15.8 +/- 1.5, respectively. In subgroup analysis, core biopsy needles proved to better in terms of CPT than fine-needle aspiration needles (18.4 vs 10.99,p = 0.003). FNB with slow-pull or suction technique provided a similar TSL (44.3 vs 53.9 mm,p = 0.40), however, slow-pull technique was better in terms of CPT (30 vs 14.6,p < 0.001). Heterogeneity was present among the studies. Another limitation is the low number randomized control trials. Conclusion EUS-guided parenchymal liver biopsy is a good alternative to other methods of liver sampling. Using FNB needles with a slow-pull technique can provide better results.

Source

Publisher

Springer

Subject

Surgery

Citation

Has Part

Source

Surgical Endoscopy & Other Interventional Techniques

Book Series Title

Edition

DOI

10.1007/s00464-020-08053-x

item.page.datauri

Link

Rights

Copyrights Note

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By

0

Views

0

Downloads

View PlumX Details