메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
Nakai Yousuke (Department of Gastroenterology Graduate School of Medicine The University of Tokyo Tokyo JapanDepar) Hamada Tsuyoshi (Department of Gastroenterology Graduate School of Medicine The University of Tokyo Tokyo Japan) Hakuta Ryunosuke (Department of Gastroenterology Graduate School of Medicine The University of Tokyo Tokyo JapanDepar) Sato Tatsuya (Department of Gastroenterology Graduate School of Medicine The University of Tokyo Tokyo Japan) Ishigaki Kazunaga (Department of Gastroenterology Graduate School of Medicine The University of Tokyo Tokyo Japan) Saito Kei (Department of Gastroenterology Graduate School of Medicine The University of Tokyo Tokyo Japan) Saito Tomotaka (Department of Gastroenterology Graduate School of Medicine The University of Tokyo Tokyo Japan) Takahara Naminatsu (Department of Gastroenterology Graduate School of Medicine The University of Tokyo Tokyo Japan) Mizuno Suguru (Department of Gastroenterology Graduate School of Medicine The University of Tokyo Tokyo Japan) Kogure Hirofumi (Department of Gastroenterology Graduate School of Medicine The University of Tokyo Tokyo Japan) Koike Kazuhiko (Department of Gastroenterology Graduate School of Medicine The University of Tokyo Tokyo Japan)
저널정보
거트앤리버 발행위원회 Gut and Liver Gut and Liver 제15권 제4호
발행연도
2021.1
수록면
625 - 633 (9page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Background/Aims: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition is widely utilized as a diagnostic modality for intra-abdominal masses, but there remains debate regarding which suction technique, slow pull (SP) or conventional suction (CS), is better. A meta-analysis of reported studies was conducted to compare the diagnostic yields of SP and CS during EUS-guided tissue acquisition. Methods: We conducted a systematic electronic search using MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to identify clinical studies comparing SP and CS. We meta-analyzed accuracy, sensitivity, blood contamination and cellularity using the random-effects model. Results: A total of 17 studies (seven randomized controlled trials, four prospective studies, and six retrospective studies) with 1,616 cases were included in the analysis. Compared to CS, there was a trend toward better accuracy (odds ratio [OR], 1.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97 to 2.27; p=0.07) and sensitivity (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 0.95 to 2.93; p=0.08) with SP and a significantly lower rate of blood contamination (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.69; p<0.01). However, there was no significant difference in cellularity between SP and CS, with an OR of 1.28 (95% CI, 0.68 to 2.40; p=0.45). When the use of a 25-gauge needle was analyzed, the accuracy and sensitivity of SP were significantly better than those of CS, with ORs of 4.81 (95% CI, 1.99 to 11.62; p<0.01) and 4.69 (95% CI, 1.93 to 11.40; p<0.01), respectively. Conclusions: Compared to CS, SP appears to provide better accuracy and sensitivity in EUSguided tissue acquisition, especially when a 25-gauge needle is used.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (40)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0