TY - JOUR
T1 - Clinical efficacy and safety of mucosal incision-assisted biopsy for the diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial tumors
T2 - A systematic review and meta-analysis
AU - Dhaliwal, Amaninder
AU - Kolli, Sindhura
AU - Dhindsa, Banreet Singh
AU - Devani, Kalpit
AU - Ramai, Daryl
AU - Sayles, Harlan
AU - Rangray, Rajani
AU - Bhat, Ishfaq
AU - Singh, Shailender
AU - Adler, Douglas G.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Hellenic Society of Gastroenterology.
PY - 2020
Y1 - 2020
N2 - Background Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and biopsy (EUS-FNA/FNB) has been traditionally used for making a tissue diagnosis. Several newer techniques are emerging as a viable alternative to EUS-FNA/FNB, including mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB), with a view to increasing the diagnostic yield for upper gastrointestinal (GI) subepithelial tumors (SETs). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to describe the overall diagnostic yield of MIAB for upper GI SETs. Methods Multiple electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Google Scholar) and conference abstracts were comprehensively searched. The primary outcome of our meta-analysis was the overall diagnostic yield of the MIAB. The secondary outcome was to study complications in terms of perforation and clinically significant bleeding. The meta-analysis was performed using a DerSimonian and Laird random-effect model. Results Seven studies were included in the final meta-analysis, reporting a total of 159 patients (male 86, female 73) with a mean age of 58 years. The overall pooled diagnostic yield of MIAB was 89% (95% confidence interval [CI] 82.65-93.51, I2=0.00). Histologically, GI stromal tumor was the reported diagnosis in 38.62% (95%CI 22.29-56.24, I2=77.51%) of tumors, followed by leiomyoma 25% (95%CI 18.02-32.62, I2=4.42%). The overall rate of clinically significant bleeding following the procedure was 5.03% (95%CI 0.36-12.86, I2=57.43%) and no perforations were reported. Conclusions MIAB is a safe and effective technique for the diagnosis of upper GI SETs and can be considered as a viable alternative to EUS-FNA/FNB. MIAB can be performed during routine endoscopy and no advanced equipment is required.
AB - Background Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and biopsy (EUS-FNA/FNB) has been traditionally used for making a tissue diagnosis. Several newer techniques are emerging as a viable alternative to EUS-FNA/FNB, including mucosal incision-assisted biopsy (MIAB), with a view to increasing the diagnostic yield for upper gastrointestinal (GI) subepithelial tumors (SETs). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to describe the overall diagnostic yield of MIAB for upper GI SETs. Methods Multiple electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Google Scholar) and conference abstracts were comprehensively searched. The primary outcome of our meta-analysis was the overall diagnostic yield of the MIAB. The secondary outcome was to study complications in terms of perforation and clinically significant bleeding. The meta-analysis was performed using a DerSimonian and Laird random-effect model. Results Seven studies were included in the final meta-analysis, reporting a total of 159 patients (male 86, female 73) with a mean age of 58 years. The overall pooled diagnostic yield of MIAB was 89% (95% confidence interval [CI] 82.65-93.51, I2=0.00). Histologically, GI stromal tumor was the reported diagnosis in 38.62% (95%CI 22.29-56.24, I2=77.51%) of tumors, followed by leiomyoma 25% (95%CI 18.02-32.62, I2=4.42%). The overall rate of clinically significant bleeding following the procedure was 5.03% (95%CI 0.36-12.86, I2=57.43%) and no perforations were reported. Conclusions MIAB is a safe and effective technique for the diagnosis of upper GI SETs and can be considered as a viable alternative to EUS-FNA/FNB. MIAB can be performed during routine endoscopy and no advanced equipment is required.
KW - Biopsy
KW - Gastrointestinal
KW - Incision
KW - Mucosal
KW - Subepithelial
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85081274921&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85081274921&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.20524/aog.2020.0460
DO - 10.20524/aog.2020.0460
M3 - Article
C2 - 32127736
AN - SCOPUS:85081274921
SN - 1108-7471
VL - 33
SP - 155
EP - 161
JO - Annals of Gastroenterology
JF - Annals of Gastroenterology
IS - 2
ER -