1. Home page
  2. Search

Diagnostic yield of deep biopsy via endoscopic submucosal dissection for the diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This item is provided by the institution :
Hellenic Society of Gastroenterology   

Repository :
Annals of Gastroenterology   

see the original item page
in the repository's web site and access all digital files if the item*



Diagnostic yield of deep biopsy via endoscopic submucosal dissection for the diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal subepithelial tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis (EN)
Bhogal, Neil
Dhaliwal, Amaninder
Mashiana, Harmeet Singh
Adler, Douglas G.
Bhat, Ishfaq
Singh, Shailender
Dhindsa, Banreet Singh
Kolli, Sindhura
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
2019-12-27
Background Conventionally, endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and biopsy (EUS-FNA)/EUS-FNB) has been used for tissue diagnosis of upper gastrointestinal (GI) subepithelial tumors (SETs). However, deep biopsy (DB) via endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is emerging as an alternative technique, given the inadequate tissue sampling with EUSFNA/EUS-FNB. Our aim was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to report the overall diagnostic yield of DB via ESD for upper GI SETs. Methods PubMed, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were searched to identify studies (from commencement to Oct 2017) that reported the DB via ESD technique for diagnosis of upper GI SETs. The primary outcome of interest was the method’s overall diagnostic yield and the secondary outcome was to the occurrence of complications. The meta-analysis was performed using the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model. Results A total of 7 studies, comprising 209 patients with a mean age of 57.3 years, were included in the final meta-analysis. The overall pooled diagnostic yield of DB via ESD for upper GI SETs was 95% (95% confidence interval [CI] 84.91-99.98, I2=78.2%). Overall, pooled outcomes of major bleeding and perforation in our meta-analysis was noted in 0.07% (95%CI 0.00-2.32, I2=0%) and 0% (95%CI 0.00-1.70, I2=0%) respectively. Data regarding major bleeding and perforation rates were not reported in 2 studies. Substantial heterogeneity was observed in our meta-analysis. Conclusion DB via ESD is an effective and safe procedure for diagnosing upper GI SETs. Further multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to validate these findings. Keywords Deep biopsy, submucosal dissection, subepithelial tumors Ann Gastroenterol 2020; 33 (1): 30-37 (EN)
English
Hellenic Society of Gastroenterology (EN)
1792-7463
1108-7471
Annals of Gastroenterology; Volume 33, No 1 (2020); 30 (EN)
Copyright (c) 2019 Annals of Gastroenterology (EN)
Hellenic Society of Gastroenterology
Annals of Gastroenterology
Original Articles



*Institutions are responsible for keeping their URLs functional (digital file, item page in repository site)