Systematic Reviews
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Gastrointest Endosc. Jul 16, 2025; 17(7): 108541
Published online Jul 16, 2025. doi: 10.4253/wjge.v17.i7.108541
Figure 1
Figure 1 PRISMA diagram summarizing the search strategy. EUS: Endoscopic ultrasound.
Figure 2
Figure 2 Methodological quality and risk of bias of the included studies. A: Summary graph of the methodological quality of the included diagnostic test accuracy studies; B: Risk of bias graph of the included randomized controlled trials.
Figure 3
Figure 3 Forest plot showing the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration compared with conventional methods. EUS: Endoscopic ultrasound; FNA: Fine-needle aspiration; CI: Confidence interval; TP: True positives; FP: False positives; FN: False negatives; TN: True negatives.
Figure 4
Figure 4 Standardized receiver operating curves curve showing the comparative diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound and conventional diagnostic methods. EUS: Endoscopic ultrasound; FNA: Fine-needle aspiration; CI: Confidence interval.
Figure 5
Figure 5 Forest plot. A: Forest plot showing the technical success rate of endoscopic ultrasound-guided interventions compared to conventional methods for managing biliary strictures; B: Forest plot showing the clinical success rate of endoscopic ultrasound-guided procedures compared to conventional methods. EUS: Endoscopic ultrasound; CI: Confidence interval.