• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

内镜超声引导下细针抽吸/活检胰腺实性肿块时,套管针慢拉法与标准抽吸法的比较:一项荟萃分析。

Stylet Slow-pull Versus Standard Suction for Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine-needle Aspiration/Biopsy of Pancreatic Solid Masses: A Meta-Analysis.

机构信息

Departments of Infectious Diseases.

Gastroenterology, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, China.

出版信息

J Clin Gastroenterol. 2021 Feb 1;55(2):103-109. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001408.

DOI:10.1097/MCG.0000000000001408
PMID:33136779
Abstract

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIM

There is limited evidence on the diagnostic performance of the stylet slow-pull (SP) method for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration/biopsy. The aim of this study was to compare the SP method with standard suction (SS) for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration/biopsy of solid pancreatic masses.

METHODS

A computerized bibliographic search of the main databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Science Citation Index, was performed through February 2020. The main outcome measurements were diagnostic accuracy, cellularity, low blood contamination, adequate core tissue acquisition, and technical success rate.

RESULTS

Eleven studies (including 6 randomized trials) were included, with a total of 504 patients who underwent SP and 551 who underwent SS. Diagnostic accuracy was significantly superior in the SP group, compared with the SS group [odds ratio (OR)=1.60; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.14-2.26]. The SP group had higher pooled rates of low blood contamination (OR=1.93; 95% CI, 1.29-2.87) and adequate core tissue acquisition (OR=1.91; 95% CI, 1.11-3.26) than the SS group. There was no significant difference between groups in the adequacy of cellularity (OR=0.99; 95% CI, 0.63-1.57; P=0.98) or technical success rate (OR=0.38; 95% CI, 0.13-1.15; P=0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

The authors provide evidence that SP is superior to SS in diagnostic accuracy, low blood contamination, and adequate core tissue acquisition, without reducing adequacy of cellularity or technical success rate.

摘要

背景和研究目的

关于超声内镜引导下细针抽吸/活检中管芯慢拉(SP)方法的诊断性能,证据有限。本研究旨在比较 SP 方法与标准抽吸(SS)在超声内镜引导下对胰腺实性肿块进行细针抽吸/活检的诊断性能。

方法

通过计算机检索主要数据库,包括 PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane 图书馆和科学引文索引,检索时间截至 2020 年 2 月。主要结局测量指标为诊断准确性、细胞数量、低血液污染、获得足够的核心组织和技术成功率。

结果

共纳入 11 项研究(包括 6 项随机试验),共有 504 例患者接受 SP 检查,551 例患者接受 SS 检查。与 SS 组相比,SP 组的诊断准确性显著更高[比值比(OR)=1.60;95%置信区间(CI),1.14-2.26]。SP 组的低血液污染(OR=1.93;95% CI,1.29-2.87)和足够的核心组织获取(OR=1.91;95% CI,1.11-3.26)的汇总率高于 SS 组。两组之间的细胞数量充足率(OR=0.99;95% CI,0.63-1.57;P=0.98)或技术成功率(OR=0.38;95% CI,0.13-1.15;P=0.09)无显著差异。

结论

作者提供的证据表明,SP 在诊断准确性、低血液污染和足够的核心组织获取方面优于 SS,而不会降低细胞数量充足率或技术成功率。

相似文献

1
Stylet Slow-pull Versus Standard Suction for Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Fine-needle Aspiration/Biopsy of Pancreatic Solid Masses: A Meta-Analysis.内镜超声引导下细针抽吸/活检胰腺实性肿块时,套管针慢拉法与标准抽吸法的比较:一项荟萃分析。
J Clin Gastroenterol. 2021 Feb 1;55(2):103-109. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001408.
2
Stylet slow-pull versus standard suction for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of solid pancreatic lesions: a multicenter randomized trial.内镜超声引导下细针抽吸术治疗胰腺实性病变时,慢拉式与标准抽吸式套管针的比较:一项多中心随机试验。
Endoscopy. 2018 May;50(5):497-504. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-122381. Epub 2017 Dec 22.
3
Stylet slow-pull vs. standard suction technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy in pancreatic solid lesions using 20 Gauge Procore™ needle: A multicenter randomized trial.使用 20G Procore™ 针的内镜超声引导下细针活检胰腺实性病变中针芯慢拉与标准抽吸技术的比较:一项多中心随机试验。
Dig Liver Dis. 2020 Feb;52(2):178-184. doi: 10.1016/j.dld.2019.08.023. Epub 2019 Oct 7.
4
A Meta-analysis of Slow Pull versus Suction for Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition.内镜超声引导下组织获取中慢拉法与抽吸法的荟萃分析。
Gut Liver. 2021 Jul 15;15(4):625-633. doi: 10.5009/gnl20270.
5
Slow pull versus suction in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid masses.内镜超声引导下细针抽吸胰腺实性肿块时缓慢提拉与抽吸的比较。
Dig Dis Sci. 2014 Jul;59(7):1578-85. doi: 10.1007/s10620-013-3019-9. Epub 2014 Jan 16.
6
Suction versus slow-pull for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic tumors: a prospective randomized trial.内镜超声引导下胰腺肿瘤细针抽吸术的吸引法与慢拉法:一项前瞻性随机试验
HPB (Oxford). 2020 May;22(5):779-786. doi: 10.1016/j.hpb.2019.10.007. Epub 2019 Oct 31.
7
Slow-pull and different conventional suction techniques in endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic solid lesions using 22-gauge needles.使用22号针在内镜超声引导下对胰腺实性病变进行细针穿刺抽吸时的慢拉及不同常规抽吸技术。
World J Gastroenterol. 2016 Oct 21;22(39):8790-8797. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v22.i39.8790.
8
Slow-Pull Using a Fanning Technique Is More Useful Than the Standard Suction Technique in EUS-Guided Fine Needle Aspiration in Pancreatic Masses.在超声内镜引导下对胰腺肿块进行细针抽吸时,扇形牵拉法比标准抽吸法更有用。
Gut Liver. 2018 May 15;12(3):360-366. doi: 10.5009/gnl17140.
9
Slow-pull technique yields better quality smears: prospective comparison of slow-pull and standard suction techniques of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration.慢拉技术可获得更好质量的涂片:内镜超声引导下细针抽吸术的慢拉技术与标准抽吸技术的前瞻性比较。
Scand J Gastroenterol. 2020 Nov;55(11):1369-1376. doi: 10.1080/00365521.2020.1825792. Epub 2020 Oct 5.
10
Prospective comparison of slow-pull and standard suction techniques of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in the diagnosis of solid pancreatic cancer.内镜超声引导下细针穿刺活检中慢拉与标准抽吸技术在实体胰腺癌诊断中的前瞻性比较
BMC Gastroenterol. 2019 Jan 9;19(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s12876-018-0921-9.

引用本文的文献

1
Diagnostic Performance of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Biopsy with Histological Analysis Versus Combined Cytohistological Analysis in Solid Pancreatic Lesions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.内镜超声引导下细针穿刺活检组织学分析与细胞组织学联合分析对实性胰腺病变的诊断性能:一项系统评价和Meta分析
Dig Dis Sci. 2025 Jul 6. doi: 10.1007/s10620-025-09175-9.
2
Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Pancreatic Tissue Sampling: Lesion Assessment, Needles, and Techniques.内镜超声引导下胰腺组织采样:病变评估、穿刺针及技术
Medicina (Kaunas). 2024 Dec 7;60(12):2021. doi: 10.3390/medicina60122021.
3
Comparison of the slow-pull and aspiration methods of endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration for next-generation sequencing-compatible tissue collection in non-small cell lung cancer.
比较慢拉法和吸引法在内镜超声引导经支气管针吸活检术获取非小细胞肺癌下一代测序兼容组织中的应用。
Cancer Med. 2023 Oct;12(19):19512-19522. doi: 10.1002/cam4.6561. Epub 2023 Sep 21.
4
Current status and issues in genomic analysis using EUS-FNA/FNB specimens in hepatobiliary-pancreatic cancers.使用超声内镜引导下细针穿刺抽吸/细针活检标本进行肝胆胰癌基因组分析的现状与问题
J Gastroenterol. 2023 Nov;58(11):1081-1093. doi: 10.1007/s00535-023-02037-z. Epub 2023 Sep 12.
5
Diagnostic Yield of Repeat Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle Biopsy for Solid Pancreatic Lesions.重复内镜超声引导下细针穿刺活检对胰腺实性病变的诊断率
Cancers (Basel). 2023 Jul 24;15(14):3745. doi: 10.3390/cancers15143745.
6
The Utility of Endoscopic-Ultrasonography-Guided Tissue Acquisition for Solid Pancreatic Lesions.内镜超声引导下对胰腺实性病变进行组织获取的效用
Diagnostics (Basel). 2022 Mar 19;12(3):753. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics12030753.