Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26819534›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of gastroenterology2016

Appraisal of needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy in the diagnosis of pancreatic cysts.

Somashekar G Krishna, Jeffery H Lee

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of gastroenterology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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.

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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. 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

2 authors.

Somashekar G KrishnaSomashekar G Krishna, Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, United States.
Jeffery H LeeSomashekar G Krishna, Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, The Ohio State University Medical Center, Columbus, OH 43210, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nearly 2.5% of cross-sectional imaging studies will report a finding of a cystic pancreatic lesion. Even though most of these are incidental findings, it remains very concerning for both patients and treating clinicians. Differentiating and predicting malignant transformation in pancreatic cystic lesions is clinically challenging. Current evaluation of suspicious cystic lesions includes a combination of radiologic imaging, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and cyst fluid analyses. Despite these attempts, precise diagnostic stratification among non-mucinous, mucinous, and malignant cystic lesions is often not possible until surgical resection. EUS-guided needle based confocal laser endomicroscopy (nCLE) for evaluation of pancreatic cysts is emerging as a powerful technique with remarkable potential. Though limited imaging data from 3 large clinical trials (INSPECT, DETECT and CONTACT) are currently the reference standard for nCLE imaging, nonetheless these have not been validated in large studies. The aim of this review article is to review the evolving role of EUS-guided nCLE in management of pancreatic cystic lesions in terms of its significance, adverse events, limitations, and implications.

Indexed as

Diagnosis, DifferentialEndoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Fine Needle AspirationHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMicroscopy, ConfocalObserver VariationPancreatic CystPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisReproducibility of ResultsEndoscopic ultrasoundIntraductal papillary mucinous neoplasmMucinous cystadenomaNeedle-based confocal laser endomicroscopyPancreatic cancerPancreatic cystSerous cystadenoma

Identifiers

PMID26819534
PMCPMC4722000

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.