ReviewEndoscopic ultrasound2014
When to puncture, when not to puncture: Submucosal tumors.
Review in Endoscopic ultrasound, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hemostatic effect of topical hemocoagulase spray in digestive endoscopy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016Trial
- Dynamic coupling enables impulsive ejection in a hydrogel catapult.Nature communications · 2026Article
- A Multifunctional Capsule-like Puncture Biopsy Robot for the Gastrointestinal System.Micromachines · 2025Article
- Endoscopic Mucosal Resection of Pancreatic Rest Presenting as a Sub-epithelial Nodule in the Gastric Antrum.Cureus · 2023Article
- Submucosal oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma with lymph node metastasis: a case report and literature review.BMC gastroenterology · 2022Review
- Article
- Understanding esophageal neurofibroma: A case series and systematic review.International journal of surgery case reports · 2020Article
- A novel technique for removing large gastric subepithelial tumors with ESD method in the subcardia region.Oncology letters · 2019Article
- Primary Signet Ring Cell Carcinoma of Rectum Diagnosed by Boring Biopsy in Combination with Endoscopic Mucosal Resection.Case reports in medicine · 2018Article
- Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound for the Diagnosis of Isolated Gastric Cavernous Haemangioma.Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR · 2016Article
- Comparison between submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection and video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for large esophageal leiomyoma originating from the muscularis propria layer.Surgical endoscopy · 2016Article
- Factors associated with endoscopic full-thickness resection of gastric submucosal tumors.Surgical endoscopy · 2015Article
- Evaluation of transabdominal ultrasound after oral administration of an echoic cellulose-based gastric ultrasound contrast agent for gastric cancer.BMC cancer · 2015Article
- [Diagnosis and therapy of benign tumors of the esophagogastric junction].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2014Review
- Controversies in EUS: Do we need miniprobes?Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
- Current endoscopic ultrasound-guided approach to incidental subepithelial lesions: optimal or optional?Annals of gastroenterologyReview
- Role of endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic-ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration in endoscopic biopsy negative gastrointestinal lesions.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
- Canalization technique to obtain deep tissue biopsy of gastrointestinal subepithelial tumors as an alternative to conventional known techniques.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
- Performance of endoscopic submucosal dissection and submucosal tunneling endoscopic resection for esophageal submucosal tumors: A multicenter retrospective cohort study.Annals of gastroenterologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Subepithelial masses of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract are a frequent source of referral for endosonographic evaluation. Subepithelial tumors most often appear as protuberances in the GI tract with normal overlying mucosa. When there is a need to obtain a sample of the mass for diagnosis, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) - guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is superior to other studies and should be the first choice to investigate any subepithelial lesion. When the decision is made to perform EUS-guided FNA several technical factors must be considered. The type and size of the needle chosen can affect diagnostic accuracy, adequacy of sample size and number of passes needed. The use of a stylet or suction and a fanning or standard technique during EUS-guided FNA are other factors that must be considered. Another method proposed to improve the efficacy of EUS-guided FNA is having an on-site cytopathologist or cytotechnician. Large or well-differentiated tumors may be more difficult to diagnose by standard EUS-FNA and the use of a biopsy needle can be used to acquire a histopathology sample. This can allow preservation of tissue architecture and cellularity of the lesion and may lead to a more definitive diagnosis. Alternatives to FNA such as taking bite-on-bite samples and endoscopic submucosal resection (ESMR) have been studied. Comparison of these two techniques found that ESMR has a significantly higher diagnostic yield. Most complications associated with EUS-FNA such as perforation, infection and pancreatitis are rare and the severity and incidence of these adverse events is not known. Controversy exists as to the optimal method in which to perform EUS-FNA and larger prospective trials are needed.
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.