Comparison of the Diagnostic Performance of Novel Slim Biopsy Forceps with Conventional Biopsy Forceps for Biliary Stricture: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Internal Medicine, Hallym University Dongtan Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine, 7, Keunjaebong-gil, Hwaseong-si, Gyeonggi-do 18450, Korea

Department of Gastroenterology, Ajou University School of Medicine, 164, Worldcup-ro, Yeongtong-gu, Suwon-si, Gyeonggi-do 16499, Korea

Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.

J. Pers. Med. 2021, 11(1), 55; https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11010055

Received: 4 December 2020 / Revised: 31 December 2020 / Accepted: 14 January 2021 / Published: 17 January 2021

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Personalized Medicine and Multidisciplinary Approach in Biliopancreatic Endoscopy)

View Full-Text Download PDF

Browse Figures

Citation Export

Abstract

Novel slim biopsy forceps provide some technical advantages to facilitate a more accurate diagnosis, although we are not aware of any comparative studies. Therefore, we compared tissue acquisition and diagnostic accuracy between novel slim biopsy forceps and conventional biopsy forceps in cases with a biliary stricture. We reviewed 341 patients who underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for the histological confirmation of biliary stricture at two tertiary hospitals between 2013 and 2020. The primary endpoint was the forceps’ diagnostic accuracies. We included 276 patients who underwent biopsy using the novel forceps (n = 130) or conventional forceps (n = 146). The novel forceps provided 81.7% sensitivity, 100.0% specificity, positive-predictive value (PPV) of 100.0%, and negative-predictive value (NPV) of 57.8%, with an accuracy of 85.4% when the diagnosis by endobiliary biopsy included suspected or positive malignancy. The conventional forceps provided 61.7% sensitivity, 100.0% specificity, PPV of 100.0%, and NPV of 36.1%, with an accuracy of 68.5%. Only novel forceps use was significantly associated with an accurate diagnosis (odds ratio: 2.70, 95% confidence interval: 1.52–5.00). There were no significant inter-group differences in the procedure-related rates of adverse events. Endobiliary biopsy using novel forceps offered better diagnostic performance and more acceptable procedure-related adverse events than conventional forceps. View Full-Text

Keywords: endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography; biliary; stricture; forceps; diagnosis

▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Jung, E.S.; Park, S.W.; Kim, J.H.; Jung, J.H.; Yang, M.J.; Park, D.H. Comparison of the Diagnostic Performance of Novel Slim Biopsy Forceps with Conventional Biopsy Forceps for Biliary Stricture: A Multicenter Retrospective Study. J. Pers. Med. 2021, 11, 55. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11010055

AMA Style

Jung ES, Park SW, Kim JH, Jung JH, Yang MJ, Park DH. Comparison of the Diagnostic Performance of Novel Slim Biopsy Forceps with Conventional Biopsy Forceps for Biliary Stricture: A Multicenter Retrospective Study. Journal of Personalized Medicine. 2021; 11(1):55. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11010055

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jung, Eun S., Se W. Park, Jung H. Kim, Jang H. Jung, Min J. Yang, and Da H. Park. 2021. "Comparison of the Diagnostic Performance of Novel Slim Biopsy Forceps with Conventional Biopsy Forceps for Biliary Stricture: A Multicenter Retrospective Study" Journal of Personalized Medicine 11, no. 1: 55. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11010055

Find Other Styles

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Abstract views Pdf views Html views

Article Menu

Comparison of the Diagnostic Performance of Novel Slim Biopsy Forceps with Conventional Biopsy Forceps for Biliary Stricture: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

Abstract

Share and Cite

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

Article Access Map by Country/Region

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI