Maximizing the endosonography: The role of contrast harmonics, elastography and confocal endomicroscopy

Table 7 Efficiency of E-endoscopic ultrasound for LN assessment

Ref.	Type of study	Final diagnosis	No. of patients	E-EUS assessment	Main results
Giovannini et al[58] 2006	Prospective	EUS-FNA	31	Color pattern	Sn = 100%
	Single center				Sp = 50%
Janssen et al[75] 2007	Prospective	EUS-FNA	66	Color pattern	Hard - Acc = 81%-86%
	Single center				Soft - Acc = 84%-86%
Săftoiu et al[95] 2007	Prospective Single center	Surgery	78	Hue histogram	Sn = 85%
		EUS-FNA			Sp = 91%
Giovannini et al[79] 2009	Prospective	Surgery	101	Color pattern	Sn = 91.8%
	Multicenter	EUS-FNA			Sp = 82.5%
Larsen et al[81] 2012	Prospective Single center	Surgery	56	Color pattern	Sn = 55%-59%
					Sp = 82%-85%
Paterson et al[78] 2012	Prospective	EUS-FNA	53	Strain ratio for malignancy = 7.5	Sn = 83%, Sp = 96%, PPV = 95%, NPV = 86%, Acc = 90%
	Single center
Knabe et al[83] 2013	Prospective	EUS-FNA	40	Color pattern	Sn = 100%
				Computed analysis	Sp = 64%
					Computed analysis
					Sn = 88.9%
					Sp = 86.7%

E-EUS: Elastographic endosonography; SR: Cut-off value of the strain ratio; Sn: Sensitivity; Sp: Specificity; PPV: Positive predictive value; NPV: Negative predictive value.