Endoscopic ultrasound‐guided versus percutaneous liver biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Paula Arruda do Espirito Santo; Gilmara Coelho Meine; Angélica Luciana Nau; Eduardo Cerchi Barbosa; Stefano Baraldo; Luciano Lenz; Fauze Maluf-Filho

doi:10.1055/a-2368-4608

Endoscopy, Table of Contents

Endoscopy 2025; 57(01): 41-48
DOI: 10.1055/a-2368-4608

Systematic review

Endoscopic ultrasound‐guided versus percutaneous liver biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Paula Arruda do Espirito Santo

¹Diagnostic Imaging and Specialized Diagnosis Unit, University Hospital of Federal University of Sao Carlos, São Carlos, Brazil

²Gastroenterology, University of Sao Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil (Ringgold ID: RIN28133)

,

Gilmara Coelho Meine

³Internal Medicine Department, FEEVALE University, Novo Hamburgo, Brazil (Ringgold ID: RIN125099)

,

Angélica Luciana Nau

⁴Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hospital Jaragua, Jaragua do Sul, Brazil (Ringgold ID: RIN650553)

,

Eduardo Cerchi Barbosa

⁵Internal Medicine, Evangelical University of Goias, Anápolis, Brazil

,

Stefano Baraldo

⁶Endoscopy, Barretos Cancer Hospital, Barretos, Brazil

,

Luciano Lenz

⁷Endoscopy Unit, University of Sao Paulo Institute of Cancer of Sao Paulo State, São Paulo, Brazil (Ringgold ID: RIN215027)

⁸Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Fleury Medicina e Saude, São Paulo, Brazil (Ringgold ID: RIN504998)

⁹Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Albert Einstein Israelite Hospital, São Paulo, Brazil (Ringgold ID: RIN37896)

,

Fauze Maluf-Filho

⁷Endoscopy Unit, University of Sao Paulo Institute of Cancer of Sao Paulo State, São Paulo, Brazil (Ringgold ID: RIN215027)

¹⁰CNPq, National Council for Scientific and Technological Development, Brasilia, Brazil (Ringgold ID: RIN164358)

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Background Percutaneous liver biopsy (PC-LB) has long been the usual method for acquisition of liver tissue. Recently, endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy (EUS-LB) has gained popularity as an alternative modality. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of EUS-LB versus PC-LB.

Methods We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EUS-LB with PC-LB published until October 20, 2023. The primary outcome was diagnostic adequacy. Secondary outcomes were: the number of complete portal tracts (CPTs), longest sample length (LSL), total sample length (TSL), post-procedure pain scores, and adverse events (AEs), including overall AEs and AEs excluding minor post-procedure symptoms. We compared binary outcomes using risk ratios (RRs) and continuous outcomes using the mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD), with 95%CIs.

Results Four RCTs (258 patients) were included. The EUS-LB group presented lower post-procedure pain scores (SMD −0.58, 95%CI −0.95 to −0.22) than the PC-LB group. Both groups performed similarly in terms of diagnostic adequacy (RR 1.0, 95%CI 0.96 to 1.04), number of CPTs (MD 2.57, 95%CI −4.09 to 9.22), LSL (MD −2.91 mm, 95%CI −5.86 to 0.03), TSL (MD 4.16 mm, 95%CI −10.12 to 18.45), overall AEs (RR 0.54, 95%CI 0.20 to 1.46), and AEs excluding minor post-procedure symptoms (RR 1.65, 95%CI 0.21 to 13.02).

Conclusions This meta-analysis suggests that EUS-LB is as safe and effective as PC-LB and is associated with lower post-procedure pain scores.

Registration on PROSPERO: CRD42023469469.

Full Text

References

References
1 Bravo AA, Sheth SG, Chopra S. Liver biopsy. NEJM 2001; 344: 495-500
2 Regev A, Berho M, Jeffers LJ. et al. Sampling error and intraobserver variation in liver biopsy in patients with chronic HCV infection. Am J Gastroenterol 2002; 97: 2614-2618
3 Neuberger J, Patel J, Caldwell H. et al. Guidelines on the use of liver biopsy in clinical practice from the British Society of Gastroenterology, the Royal College of Radiologists and the Royal College of Pathology. Gut 2020; 69: 1382-1403
4 Thomaides-Brears HB, Alkhouri N, Allende D. et al. Incidence of complications from percutaneous biopsy in chronic liver disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Dig Dis Sci 2022; 67: 3366-3394
5 Lesmana CRA, Paramitha MS, Gani RA. The role of interventional endoscopic ultrasound in liver diseases: what have we learnt?. Can J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2021; 2021: 9948979
6 Rudnick SR, Conway JD, Russo MW. Current state of endohepatology: Diagnosis and treatment of portal hypertension and its complications with endoscopic ultrasound. World J Hepatol 2021; 13: 887-895
7 Dewitt J, McGreevy K, Cummings O. et al. Initial experience with EUS-guided Tru-cut biopsy of benign liver disease. Gastrointest Endosc 2009; 69: 535-542
8 Mohan BP, Shakhatreh M, Garg R. et al. Efficacy and safety of EUS-guided liver biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 2019; 89: 238-246.e3
9 Facciorusso A, Crinò SF, Ramai D. et al. Diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy in comparison to percutaneous liver biopsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2022; 16: 51-57
10 Chandan S, Deliwala S, Khan SR. et al. EUS-guided versus percutaneous liver biopsy: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis of outcomes. Endosc Ultrasound 2023; 12: 171-180
11 Higgins J, Thomas J, Chandler J. et al. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.3 (updated February 2022). Cochrane. 2022 Accessed July 08, 2024 at: www.training.cochrane.org/handbook
12 Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM. et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021; 372: n71
13 Luo D, Wan X, Liu J. et al. Optimally estimating the sample mean from the sample size, median, mid-range, and/or mid-quartile range. Stat Methods Med Res 2018; 27: 1785-1805
14 Wan X, Wang W, Liu J. et al. Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from the sample size, median, range and/or interquartile range. BMC Med Res Methodol 2014; 14: 135
15 Ali AH, Nallapeta NS, Yousaf MN. et al. EUS-guided versus percutaneous liver biopsy: A prospective randomized clinical trial. Endosc Ultrasound 2023; 12: 334-341
16 Samanta J, Chavan R, Gupta P. et al. EUS-guided liver biopsy scores over radiology guided percutaneous liver biopsy: a multicenter randomised controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc 2022; 95: AB485-AB486
17 Bang JY, Ward TJ, Guirguis S. et al. Radiology-guided percutaneous approach is superior to EUS for performing liver biopsies. Gut 2021; 70: 2224-2226
18 Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ. et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 2019; 366: l4898
19 Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Brozek J. et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies. BMJ 2008; 336: 1106-1110
20 Lariño-Noia J, Fernández-Castroagudín J, de la Iglesia-García D. et al. Quality of tissue samples obtained by endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy: a randomized, controlled clinical trial. Am J Gastroenterol 2023; 118: 1821-1828
21 Lau J, Ioannidis JPA, Terrin N. et al. The case of the misleading funnel plot. BMJ 2006; 333: 597-600
22 Téllez-Ávila FI, García-Saenz-de-Sicilia M. Endohepatology: current status and perspectives. Ann Hepatol 2022; 27: 100730
23 Pineda JJ, Diehl DL, Miao CL. et al. EUS-guided liver biopsy provides diagnostic samples comparable with those via the percutaneous or transjugular route. Gastrointest Endosc 2016; 83: 360-365
24 Sundaram S, Shah B, Jagtap N. et al. Diagnostic efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy for diffuse liver diseases and its predictors – a multicentric retrospective analysis. Clin Exp Hepatol 2023; 9: 243-250
25 Ramai D, Pannu V, Facciorusso A. et al. Advances in endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided liver biopsy. Diagn Basel Switz 2023; 13: 784
26 Diehl DL. Top tips regarding EUS-guided liver biopsy. Gastrointest Endosc 2022; 95: 368-371
27 Choi AY, Chang KJ, Samarasena JB. et al. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided porto-systemic pressure gradient measurement correlates with histological hepatic fibrosis. Dig Dis Sci 2022; 67: 5685-5692
28 Rangwani S, Ardeshna DR, Mumtaz K. et al. Update on endoscopic ultrasound-guided liver biopsy. World J Gastroenterol 2022; 28: 3586-3594
29 DeWitt JM, Arain M, Chang KJ. et al. Interventional endoscopic ultrasound: current status and future directions. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2021; 19: 24-40
30 Diehl DL, Confer B, Adler DG. et al. EUS-guided versus percutaneous liver biopsy: Do we have a winner?. Endosc Ultrasound 2022; 11: 339-341
31 Shuja A, Alkhasawneh A, Fialho A. et al. Comparison of EUS-guided versus percutaneous and transjugular approaches for the performance of liver biopsies. Dig Liver Dis 2019; 51: 826-830
32 Rockey DC, Caldwell SH, Goodman ZD. et al. Liver biopsy. Hepatology 2009; 49: 1017-1044

Supplementary Material

Supplementary Material