Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27446324›Full record

ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2016

Role of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration in the diagnosis of mass lesions.

Chaoqun Han, Rong Lin, Qin Zhang, Jun Liu, Zhen Ding, Xiaohua Hou

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Imaging modalities for characterising focal pancreatic lesions.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chaoqun HanDepartment of Gastroenterology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei 430022, P.R. China.
Rong LinDepartment of Gastroenterology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei 430022, P.R. China.
Qin ZhangDepartment of Pathology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei 430022, P.R. China.
Jun LiuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei 430022, P.R. China.
Zhen DingDepartment of Gastroenterology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei 430022, P.R. China.
Xiaohua HouDepartment of Gastroenterology, Union Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei 430022, P.R. China.
Union Hospital · CNHuazhong University of Science and Technology · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) is an accurate technique for sampling the pancreas and mediastinum; however, limited data are available for other mass lesions. The aim of this study was to explore the value of EUS-FNA in the differential diagnosis of all mass lesions. Data from patients who underwent EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of mass lesions, including pancreatic, mediastinal, celiac and retroperitoneal lesions were retrospectively analyzed. The accuracy was calculated by comparing the results of FNA with the results of pathological examination or follow-up surveillances in non-operated cases. A total of 150 cases were included. The location of the mass varied from the pancreas (n=62) to the mediastinum (n=29), gastrointestinal tract (n=36), celiac cavity and retroperitoneum (n=23). The sensitivity and Youdens index of EUS-FNA in the diagnosis of all lesions were 92.97% and 0.93 respectively. The accuracy of diagnosis of pancreatic, mediastinal, gastrointestinal, celiac and retroperitoneal lesions was 85.48, 89.66, 83.33 and 78.23%, respectively. Masses were categorized into parenchymal organs (n=66), luminal organs (n=36) and enlarged lymph nodes (n=33). Lesions in parenchymal organs were likely to be bigger than those in luminal organs (P=0.03) and enlarged lymph nodes (P=0.01). For solid and cystic masses, which constituted 63.3 and 14.7% of the total masses, no significant difference in diagnostic accuracy was observed (P=0.56); however, lesion sizes were significantly different between these two groups (P=0.04) and the majority of cystic masses were identified in women (P=0.03). Malignant lesions were more common in older (P=0.01) and male (P=0.03) patients. In conclusion, EUS-FNA is an effective tool in the diagnosis of unexplained mass lesions; it influences the management of patients by enabling the appropriate treatment to be identified.

Indexed as

diagnosisendoscopic ultrasonographyfine needlemass lesion

Identifiers

PMID27446324
PMCPMC4950895
OpenAlexW2416658804

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.