ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound2012
Power Doppler endoscopic ultrasound for the assessment of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.
Article in Endoscopic ultrasound, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Echoendoscopic evaluation of the vascular pattern of solid pancreatic lesions as a predictor of neuroendocrine neoplasms: a retrospective study in Mexico.Clinical endoscopy · 2026Article
- An endoscopic ultrasound-based interpretable deep learning model and nomogram for distinguishing pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors from pancreatic cancer.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Construction and validation of an endoscopic ultrasonography-based ultrasomics nomogram for differentiating pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors from pancreatic cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Computed tomography perfusion imaging evaluation of angiogenesis in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma.World journal of clinical cases · 2022Article
- Anticancer Effect of Heparin-Taurocholate Conjugate on Orthotopically Induced Exocrine and Endocrine Pancreatic Cancer.Cancers · 2021Article
- Simple Vascular Architecture Classification in Predicting Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor Grade and Prognosis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2018Article
- Present status and perspectives of endosonography 2017 in gastroenterology.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2018Review
- Do we need contrast agents for EUS?Endoscopic ultrasoundReview
- Clinical impact of strain histogram EUS elastography and contrast-enhanced EUS for the differential diagnosis of focal pancreatic masses: A prospective multicentric study.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivePancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PNET) represent rare, heterogeneous tumors with clinical, imaging and treatment particularities. The aim of this study was to assess the role of power Doppler endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in the diagnosis and characterization of PNET.
methodsAll consecutive patients with PNET assessed by power Doppler EUS in the Research Centre of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Craiova, Romania, in the past 51 months were included in the study. All EUS examinations were performed initially in gray-scale mode, followed by power Doppler mode examinations, before and after contrast-enhancement. Each recorded EUS movie was further subjected to post-processing using a computer-enhanced dynamic analysis using a special plug-in which permitted assessment of vascularity index (EUS-VI).
resultsBased on the analysis of all consecutive malignant focal pancreatic masses diagnosed in the study period, a total number of 131 consecutive patients were included: 14 patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors and 117 patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The sensitivity of the pre-contrast EUS-VI for the diagnosis of PNET was 71.43%, similar to EUS-FNA. After contrast enhancement, the EUS-VI is also higher in PNET (27.07%) as compared to pancreatic adenocarcinoma where it was significantly lower 9.82% (P < 0.001). However, the sensitivity of EUS-VI after contrast enhancement for the diagnosis of PNET was 100%, higher than pre-contrast EUS-VI, with an acceptable specificity (79.49%) and better accuracy (81.68%).
conclusionPower Doppler EUS represents a useful method in the initial assessment of PNET. Using evaluation of vascularity through EUS-VI, the differentiation between PNET and pancreatic cancer could be possible, especially in the subgroup of patients where EUS-guided fine needle aspiration is falsely negative.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.