Skip to main content

Table 3 Summary of diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasonography with fine-needle aspiration for solid pancreatic lesions

From: Endoscopic ultrasonography with fine-needle aspiration for histological diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses: a meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy studies

Study

Year

TP

FP

FN

TN

Sensitivity

Specificity

LR+

LR-

DOR

Giovannini

1995

27

0

9

7

75 (58–88)

100 (59–100)

11.9 (0.81–175)

0.3 (0.15–0.49)

43 (2–835)

Cahn

1996

26

0

4

20

87 (69–96)

100 (83–100)

35.9 (2.3–557)

0.15 (0.06–0.4)

241 (12–4744)

Bhutani

1997

37

0

6

4

86 (72–94)

100 (40–100)

8.5 (0.6–118.5)

0.16 (0.08–0.35)

52 (2.5–1083)

Faigel

1997

30

0

2

9

94 (79–99)

100 (66–100)

18.5(1.2–276)

0.08 (0.02–0.27)

232(10–5263)

Chang

1997

32

0

3

11

91 (77–98)

100 (72–100)

21.7 (1.4–327.5)

0.1 (0.04–0.28)

214(10–4458)

Bentz

1998

29

0

2

7

94 (79–99)

100 (59–100)

14.8 (1–216.4)

0.08 (0.025–0.28)

177(8–4090)

Voss

2000

60

1

22

7

73 (62–82)

88 (47–99.7)

5.8 (0.9–36.8)

0.3 (0.2–0.48)

19 (2.2–164)

Gress

2001

57

0

3

34

95 (86–99)

100 (90–100)

66 (4.2–1035)

0.06 (0.02–0.16)

1134 (56.828–22612)

Ylagan

2002

35

0

4

35

90 (76–97)

100 (90–100)

63.9 (4.1–1004)

0.11 (0.048–0.27)

560(29–10793)

Harewood

2002

154

6

10

15

94 (89–97)

71 (48–89)

3.3 (1.7–6.5)

0.09 (0.044–0.17)

39(12–121)

Raut

2003

197

0

19

15

91 (87–95)

100 (78–100)

29 (1.9–446)

0.09 (0.06–0.14)

314(18.083–5451.5)

Afify

2003

43

2

11

9

80 (67–89)

82 (48–98)

4.4 (1.2–15.5)

0.25 (0.14–0.45)

18 (3–93)

Agarwal

2004

63

0

8

10

89 (79–95)

100 (69–100)

19 (1.3–291)

0.12 (0.07–0.24)

157 (8–2926.2)

Ryozawa

2005

23

0

5

19

82 (63–94)

100 (82–100)

32.4 (2.1–503)

0.2 (0.09–0.414)

166 (9–3205)

Eloubeidi

2007

414

8

24

94

95 (92–97)

92 (85–97)

12.1 (6.2–23.5)

0.06 (0.04–0.09)

202.69 88.302–465.25

Fisher

2009

82

0

3

13

97 (90–99)

100 (75–100)

26.3 (1.7–399)

0.07 (0.03–0.15)

405 (21.2–7751)

Krishna

2009

299

5

21

299

93 (90–96)

98 (96–99.5)

57 (24–136)

0.07 (0.044–0.1)

851 (317–2288

Touchefeu

2009

66

1

19

4

78 (67–86)

80 (28–99.5)

3.9 (0.7–22.5)

0.28 (0.16–0.5]

13.9 (1.5–132)

Cherian

2010

65

0

6

11

92 (83–97)

100 (72–100)

22 (2–330)

0.09 (0.05–0.2)

232 (12–4401)

Uehara

2011

76

1

4

39

95 (88–99)

98 (87–100)

38 (6–263)

0.05 (0.02–0.13]

741 (80–6857)

  1. TP true positive, FP false positive, FN false negative, TN true negative, LR+ positive likely ratio, LR- negative likely ratio, DOR Diagnostic Odds Ratio