Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26946134›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology2016

Endoscopic ultrasonography in pediatric patients--Experience from a tertiary care center in India.

Ramit Mahajan, Ebby George Simon, Ashok Chacko, D Viswanath Reddy, P Rupesh Kalyan, A J Joseph, Amit Kumar Dutta, Sudipta Dhar Chowdhury, Reuben Thomas Kurien

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. EUS in pediatric patients.Endoscopic ultrasound
    Review
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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ramit MahajanDepartment of Gastroenterology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, 632 004, Tamil Nadu, India.
Ebby George SimonDepartment of Gastroenterology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, 632 004, Tamil Nadu, India. ebbysimon@gmail.com.
Ashok ChackoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, 632 004, Tamil Nadu, India.
D Viswanath ReddyDepartment of Gastroenterology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, 632 004, Tamil Nadu, India.
P Rupesh KalyanDepartment of Gastroenterology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, 632 004, Tamil Nadu, India.
A J JosephDepartment of Gastroenterology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, 632 004, Tamil Nadu, India.
Amit Kumar DuttaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, 632 004, Tamil Nadu, India.
Sudipta Dhar ChowdhuryDepartment of Gastroenterology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, 632 004, Tamil Nadu, India.
Reuben Thomas KurienDepartment of Gastroenterology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, 632 004, Tamil Nadu, India.
Christian Medical College & Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsAlthough endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is used in the management of various gastrointestinal (GI) diseases in adults, data on its role in children is limited. This study evaluated the indications, safety, and impact of EUS in children.

methodsRecords of children (<18 years age) who underwent EUS between January 2006 and September 2014 were reviewed retrospectively and analyzed.

resultsOne hundred and twenty-one children (70 males, 51 females) aged 15.2 ± 2.9 years (mean ± SD) underwent 123 diagnostic (including fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) in 7) and 2 therapeutic EUS procedures. Conscious sedation was used in 81 procedures (65%) and general anesthesia in 44 (35%). The pancreaticobiliary system was evaluated in 114 (118 procedures), mediastinum in 5, and stomach in 2 patients. EUS diagnosed chronic pancreatitis (21 patients), pancreatic necrosis (1), splenic artery pseudoaneurysm (1), gastric varix (1), pseudocysts (3), insulinomas (2), other pancreatic masses (2), choledocholithiasis (2), choledochal cysts (2), portal biliopathy (1), esophageal leiomyoma (1), gastric neuroendocrine tumor (NET) (1), and GI stromal tumor in stomach (1). EUS-guided FNAC was positive in four of seven patients (two had tuberculosis, one pancreatic solid pseudopapillary tumor, and one gastric NET). Three patients had minor adverse events. EUS had a positive clinical impact in 43 (35.5%) patients.

conclusionsEUS is feasible and safe in children. It provides valuable information that helps in their clinical management.

Indexed as

EndosonographyTertiary Care CentersAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolDigestive SystemDigestive System DiseasesFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansIndiaInfantMalePediatricsRetrospective StudiesBiliary treeDiagnosisEndosonographyImagingPancreasPediatric

Identifiers

PMID26946134
OpenAlexW2296494560

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.