4.6 Review

Efficacy and Safety of Digital Single-Operator Cholangioscopy in the Diagnosis of Indeterminate Biliary Strictures by Targeted Biopsies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

期刊

DIAGNOSTICS
卷 10, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics10090666

关键词

digital single-operator cholangioscopy; SpyGlass (TM) DS; indeterminate biliary stricture; cholangiocarcinoma; peroral cholangioscopy

资金

  1. Jilin Science and Technology Development Program (CN) [20191102031YY]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Biliary strictures are frequently encountered in clinical practice. The determination of their nature is often difficult. This study aims to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of the second generation of digital single-operator cholangioscopy (SpyGlass DS, DSOC) in indeterminate biliary strictures (IBDS) through biopsies. Methods: All relative studies published in Medline, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and EMBASE were included. The diagnostic tests for IBDS were compared to the surgical histology, autopsy, or long-term clinical follow-up. The methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated by the Quality Assessment of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy Included in Systematic Reviews (QUADAS-2). Results: A total of 11 studies, which involved 356 patients diagnosed through biopsies, were included. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio and diagnostic odds ratio were 0.74 (95% CI: 0.67-0.80), 0.98 (95% CI: 0.95-1.00), 10.52 (95% CI: 5.45-20.32), 0.31 (95% CI: 0.23-0.41), and 65.18 (95% CI: 26.79-158.61), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.9479, and the pooled adverse event rate was 7%. The sensitivity and specificity in the heterogeneity analysis were I-2 = 48.1% and I-2 = 25.4%, respectively. Conclusion: SpyGlass DS is a safe and effective technique for IBDS. However, future randomized trials are needed to determine optimal number of biopsies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据