Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21274380›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2011

EUS-guided drainage is more successful in pancreatic pseudocysts compared with abscesses.

Riadh Sadik, Evangelos Kalaitzakis, Anders Thune, Jan Hansen, Claes Jönson

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Acute pancreatitis: mechanisms and therapeutic approaches.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The assessment of endosonographers in training.World journal of clinical cases · 2018
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound.Frontline gastroenterology · 2017
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Riadh SadikInstitute of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. riadh.sadik@vgregion.se
Evangelos Kalaitzakis
Anders Thune
Jan Hansen
Claes Jönson

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo compare the results for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainage of clear fluid pancreatic pseudocysts with the results for abscess drainage.

methodsAll patients referred for endoscopic drainage of a fluid collection were prospectively included. The outcome was recorded.

resultsAltogether 26 pseudocysts or abscesses were treated in 25 (6 female) patients. One endoscopist performed the procedures. Non-infected pseudocysts were present in 15 patients and 10 patients had infected fluid collections. The cyst size ranged between 28 cm × 13 cm and 5 cm × 5 cm. The EUS drainage was successful in 94% of the pseudocysts and in 80% of the abscesses (P = 0.04). The complication rate in pseudocysts was 6% and in abscesses was 30% (P = 0.02). Recurrence of a pseudocyst occurred in one patient (4%) after 6 mo; the patient was successfully retreated.

conclusionEUS-guided drainage of pseudocysts is associated with a higher success rate and a lower complication rate compared with abscess drainage.

Indexed as

AbscessAdultAgedChildDrainageEndosonographyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPancreatic PseudocystProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultAbscessDrainageEndoscopic ultrasoundPancreasPseudocyst

Identifiers

PMID21274380
PMCPMC3027017

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.