Comparison of EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB for diagnosis of solid pancreatic mass lesions: a meta-analysis of prospective studies.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To quantitatively compare the diagnostic value of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) in solid pancreatic mass lesions using a systematic evaluation method.Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted on public databases to include studies comparing the diagnostic value of EUS-FNA and EUS-FNB in solid pancreatic mass lesions. The combined effect size was estimated using mean difference (MD) and risk difference (RD) respectively, and the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated.Results: The 12 articles (7 RCTs and 5 cohort studies) met the inclusion criteria of this study. The meta-analysis showed that compared with EUS-FNB, EUS-FNA had lower diagnostic accuracy (RD -0.08, 95% CI -0.15, -0.01) and specimen adequacy (RD -0.08, 95% CI -0.15, -0.02), while higher required number of needle passes (MD 0.42, 95% CI 0.12, 0.73). However, EUS-FNB and EUS-FNA presented similar overall complications (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.01, 0.02) and technical failures (RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.02, 0.00), without statistically significant differences.Conclusions: Compared with EUS-FNA, EUS-FNB seems to be a better choice for diagnosing suspected pancreatic lesions.