Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25901210›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy2015

Endoscopic ultrasound in the evaluation of pancreatic neoplasms-solid and cystic: A review.

Eric M Nelsen, Darya Buehler, Anurag V Soni, Deepak V Gopal

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. How to measure quality in endoscopic ultrasound.Annals of translational medicine · 2018
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Eric M NelsenEric M Nelsen, Anurag V Soni, Deepak V Gopal, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Wisconsin - School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI 53705, United States.
Darya BuehlerEric M Nelsen, Anurag V Soni, Deepak V Gopal, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Wisconsin - School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI 53705, United States.
Anurag V SoniEric M Nelsen, Anurag V Soni, Deepak V Gopal, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Wisconsin - School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI 53705, United States.
Deepak V GopalEric M Nelsen, Anurag V Soni, Deepak V Gopal, Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Wisconsin - School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI 53705, United States.
University of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pancreatic neoplasms have a wide range of pathology, from pancreatic adenocarcinoma to cystic mucinous neoplasms. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) with or without fine needle aspiration (FNA) is a helpful diagnostic tool in the work-up of pancreatic neoplasms. Its utility in pancreatic malignancy is well known. Over the last two decades EUS-FNA has become a procedure of choice for diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. EUS-FNA is highly sensitive and specific for solid lesions, with sensitivities as high as 80%-95% for pancreatic masses and specificity as high as 75%-100%. Multiple aspects of the procedure have been studied to optimize the rate of diagnosis with EUS-FNA including cytopathologist involvement, needle size, suctioning and experience of endoscopist. Onsite pathology is one of the most important elements in increasing diagnostic yield rate in EUS-FNA. EUS-FNA is valuable in diagnosing rare and atypical pancreatic neoplasms including neuroendocrine, lymphoma and metastatic disease. As more and more patients undergo cross sectional imaging, cystic lesions of the pancreas are becoming a more common occurrence and EUS-FNA of these lesions can be helpful for differentiation. This review covers the technical aspects of optimizing pancreatic neoplasm diagnosis rate, highlight rare pancreatic neoplasms and role of EUS-FNA, and also outline the important factors in diagnosis of cystic lesions by EUS-FNA.

Indexed as

Endoscopic ultrasound-fine needle aspirationPancreatic adenocarcinomaPancreatic cystsPancreatic neoplasmsReview

Identifiers

PMID25901210
PMCPMC4400620
OpenAlexW1431246819

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.