Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26643697›Full record

ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound

Role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology, viscosity, and carcinoembryonic antigen in pancreatic cyst fluid.

Samer Alkaade, Elie Chahla, Michael Levy

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Endoscopic ultrasound. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04140435 (How Does the EUS-guided Through-the-needle Microforceps Biopsy Improve Diagnosis of Pancreatic Cystic Lesions), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT04140435 unknown statusnot on this map

How Does the EUS-guided Through-the-needle Microforceps Biopsy Improve Diagnosis of Pancreatic Cystic Lesions: A Multicenter Prospective Study

TypeobservationalSponsorInstitute of Gastroenterology and Advance EndoscopyRan2019 to 2022Enrolled50ConditionsPancreatic CystArmsEUS-guided through-the-needle microbiopsy forceps (Moray)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Rapid On-Site Evaluation (ROSE): A Microfluidic Approach.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Serous pancreatic neoplasia, data and review.World journal of gastroenterology · 2017
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

3 authors.

Samer AlkaadeDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
Elie Chahla
Michael Levy

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Due to the advances and increased utility of abdominal cross-sectional imaging, the diagnosis of pancreatic cysts continues to increase. Many endosonographers, pancreatologists, and surgeons consider endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) to be an essential tool in the management of pancreatic cystic lesions (PCLs). EUS can help distinguish between mucinous and nonmucinous lesions and may identify the specific cyst type. EUS achieves these goals by delineating the cyst morphology, identifying high risk stigmata and worrisome features, and through image-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and cyst fluid analysis. However, recent consensus statements have called to question the utility and diminished the role of EUS in this setting. The aim of this review is to assess the role and advances of EUS-FNA in pancreatic cyst fluid analysis, specifically in terms of fluid cytology, viscosity, and carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) analysis.

Identifiers

PMID26643697
PMCPMC4672587

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

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.