Background: The efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) compared to percutaneous liver biopsy (PC-LB) remains uncertain. Methods: Our data consist of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EUS-LB to PC-LB, found through a literature search via PubMed/Medline and Embase. The primary outcome was sample adequacy, whereas secondary outcomes were longest and total lengths of tissue specimens, diagnostic accuracy, and number of complete portal tracts (CPTs). Results: Sample adequacy did not significantly differ between EUS-LB and PC-LB (risk ratio [RR] 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58–2.38; p = 0.65), with very low evidence quality and inadequate sample size as per trial sequential analysis (TSA). The two techniques were equivalent with respect to diagnostic accuracy (RR: 1; CI: 0.95–1.05; p = 0.88), mean number of complete portal tracts (mean difference: 2.29, −4.08 to 8.66; p = 0.48), and total specimen length (mean difference: −0.51, −20.92 to 19.9; p = 0.96). The mean maximum specimen length was significantly longer in the PC-LB group (mean difference: −3.11, −5.51 to −0.71; p = 0.01), and TSA showed that the required information size was reached. Conclusion: EUS-LB and PC-LB are comparable in terms of diagnostic performance although PC-LB provides longer non-fragmented specimens.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bhandari et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: