Mucosal incision-assisted biopsy versus endoscopic ultrasound-assisted tissue acquisition for subepithelial lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Background/Aims Mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB) for tissue acquisition (TA) from subepithelial lesions (SELs) is emerging as an alternative to endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided TA. Only a limited number of studies compared the diagnostic utility of MIAB and EUS for upper gastrointestinal (G...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
2022-09-01
|
| Series: | Clinical Endoscopy |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.e-ce.org/upload/pdf/ce-2022-133.pdf |
| _version_ | 1827775588884021248 |
|---|---|
| author | Suprabhat Giri Shivaraj Afzalpurkar Sumaswi Angadi Sridhar Sundaram |
| author_facet | Suprabhat Giri Shivaraj Afzalpurkar Sumaswi Angadi Sridhar Sundaram |
| author_sort | Suprabhat Giri |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background/Aims Mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB) for tissue acquisition (TA) from subepithelial lesions (SELs) is emerging as an alternative to endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided TA. Only a limited number of studies compared the diagnostic utility of MIAB and EUS for upper gastrointestinal (GI) SELs; therefore, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods A comprehensive literature search from January 2020 to January 2022 was performed to compare the diagnostic accuracy and safety of MIAB and EUS-guided TA for upper GI SELs. Results Seven studies were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled technical success rate (risk ratio [RR], 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89–1.04) and procedural time (mean difference=–4.53 seconds; 95% CI, –22.38 to 13.31] were comparable between both the groups. The overall chance of obtaining a positive diagnostic yield was lower with EUS than with MIAB for all lesions (RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.71–0.98) but comparable when using a fine-needle biopsy needle (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.83–1.04). The positive diagnostic yield of MIAB was higher for lesions <20 mm (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63–0.89). Six studies reported no adverse events. Conclusions MIAB can be considered an effective alternative to EUS-guided TA for upper GI SELs without an increased risk of adverse events. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-11T13:52:20Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-6fc1cb3040c4439cb0bacd69385dbb91 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2234-2400 2234-2443 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-11T13:52:20Z |
| publishDate | 2022-09-01 |
| publisher | Korean Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Clinical Endoscopy |
| spelling | doaj.art-6fc1cb3040c4439cb0bacd69385dbb912023-11-02T08:18:02ZengKorean Society of Gastrointestinal EndoscopyClinical Endoscopy2234-24002234-24432022-09-0155561562510.5946/ce.2022.1337676Mucosal incision-assisted biopsy versus endoscopic ultrasound-assisted tissue acquisition for subepithelial lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysisSuprabhat Giri0Shivaraj Afzalpurkar1Sumaswi Angadi2Sridhar Sundaram3 Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, India Institute of Gastrosciences and Liver, Apollo Multispecialty Hospital, Kolkata, India Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, India Department of Digestive Diseases and Clinical Nutrition, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, IndiaBackground/Aims Mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB) for tissue acquisition (TA) from subepithelial lesions (SELs) is emerging as an alternative to endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided TA. Only a limited number of studies compared the diagnostic utility of MIAB and EUS for upper gastrointestinal (GI) SELs; therefore, we conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods A comprehensive literature search from January 2020 to January 2022 was performed to compare the diagnostic accuracy and safety of MIAB and EUS-guided TA for upper GI SELs. Results Seven studies were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled technical success rate (risk ratio [RR], 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89–1.04) and procedural time (mean difference=–4.53 seconds; 95% CI, –22.38 to 13.31] were comparable between both the groups. The overall chance of obtaining a positive diagnostic yield was lower with EUS than with MIAB for all lesions (RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.71–0.98) but comparable when using a fine-needle biopsy needle (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.83–1.04). The positive diagnostic yield of MIAB was higher for lesions <20 mm (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63–0.89). Six studies reported no adverse events. Conclusions MIAB can be considered an effective alternative to EUS-guided TA for upper GI SELs without an increased risk of adverse events.http://www.e-ce.org/upload/pdf/ce-2022-133.pdfbiopsyendoscopic ultrasoundmucosal incisionsubepithelial lesion |
| spellingShingle | Suprabhat Giri Shivaraj Afzalpurkar Sumaswi Angadi Sridhar Sundaram Mucosal incision-assisted biopsy versus endoscopic ultrasound-assisted tissue acquisition for subepithelial lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis Clinical Endoscopy biopsy endoscopic ultrasound mucosal incision subepithelial lesion |
| title | Mucosal incision-assisted biopsy versus endoscopic ultrasound-assisted tissue acquisition for subepithelial lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_full | Mucosal incision-assisted biopsy versus endoscopic ultrasound-assisted tissue acquisition for subepithelial lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_fullStr | Mucosal incision-assisted biopsy versus endoscopic ultrasound-assisted tissue acquisition for subepithelial lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_full_unstemmed | Mucosal incision-assisted biopsy versus endoscopic ultrasound-assisted tissue acquisition for subepithelial lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_short | Mucosal incision-assisted biopsy versus endoscopic ultrasound-assisted tissue acquisition for subepithelial lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| title_sort | mucosal incision assisted biopsy versus endoscopic ultrasound assisted tissue acquisition for subepithelial lesions a systematic review and meta analysis |
| topic | biopsy endoscopic ultrasound mucosal incision subepithelial lesion |
| url | http://www.e-ce.org/upload/pdf/ce-2022-133.pdf |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT suprabhatgiri mucosalincisionassistedbiopsyversusendoscopicultrasoundassistedtissueacquisitionforsubepitheliallesionsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT shivarajafzalpurkar mucosalincisionassistedbiopsyversusendoscopicultrasoundassistedtissueacquisitionforsubepitheliallesionsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT sumaswiangadi mucosalincisionassistedbiopsyversusendoscopicultrasoundassistedtissueacquisitionforsubepitheliallesionsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT sridharsundaram mucosalincisionassistedbiopsyversusendoscopicultrasoundassistedtissueacquisitionforsubepitheliallesionsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |