EUS-guided versus percutaneous liver biopsy: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis of outcomes
Department
Internal Medicine
Document Type
Article
Publication Title
Endoscopic Ultrasound
Abstract
EUS-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) has gained momentum in recent years, especially with availability of newer needle designs. Given the emerging comparative data on EUS-LB with second-generation needles and percutaneous LB (PC-LB), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the safety and efficacy of the two techniques. We searched multiple databases from inception through November 2021 to identify studies comparing outcomes of EUS-LB and PC-LB. Pooled estimates were calculated using a random-effects model, and the results were expressed in terms of pooled proportions and odds ratio (OR) along with relevant 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Five studies with 748 patients were included in the final analysis. EUS-LB was performed in 276 patients and PC-LB in 472 patients. Across all studies, PC-LB had an overall higher diagnostic accuracy than EUS-LB, 98.6% confidence interval (CI: 94.7-99.7) versus 88.3% (49.6-98.3), OR: 1.65, P = 0.04. On assessing data from randomized controlled trials, there was no difference between the two. While pooled diagnostic adequacy and overall adverse events were not significantly different between PC-LB and EUS-LB, the former was superior in terms of the mean number of complete portal tracts (CPT) and total specimen length. PC-LB and EUS-LB produce similar results. PC-LB allows obtaining longer samples and more CPT. Further studies are needed to see if these trends hold up as more providers begin to perform EUS-LB.
First Page
171
Last Page
180
DOI
10.4103/EUS-D-21-00268
Volume
12
Issue
2
Publication Date
3-1-2023
PubMed ID
36204798
Recommended Citation
Chandan, S., Deliwala, S., Khan, S. R., Mohan, B. P., Dhindsa, B. S., Bapaye, J., Goyal, H., Kassab, L. L., Kamal, F., Sayles, H. R., Kochhar, G. S., & Adler, D. G. (2023). EUS-guided versus percutaneous liver biopsy: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis of outcomes. Endoscopic Ultrasound, 12 (2), 171-180. https://doi.org/10.4103/EUS-D-21-00268