Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28218202›Full record

ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound

Contrast-enhanced (endoscopic) ultrasound and endoscopic ultrasound elastography in gastrointestinal stromal tumors.

Andre Ignee, Christian Jenssen, Michael Hocke, Yi Dong, Wen-Ping Wang, Xin-Wu Cui, Matthias Woenckhaus, Sevastita Iordache, Adrian Saftoiu, Gudrun Schuessler and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
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. Cited by 52 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

52 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 101 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) Guided Elastography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Andre IgneeCaritas-Krankenhaus, Bad Mergentheim, Germany.
Christian JenssenKrankenhaus Märkisch Oderland, Wriezen, Akademisches Lehrkrankenhaus Medizinische Hochschule Brandenburg, Germany.
Michael HockeKlinikum Meiningen, Meiningen, Germany.
Yi DongZhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Wen-Ping WangZhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Xin-Wu CuiThe Department of Medical Ultrasound, Tongji Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Matthias WoenckhausCaritas-Krankenhaus, Bad Mergentheim, Germany.
Sevastita IordacheResearch Center in Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Craiova, Romania.
Adrian SaftoiuResearch Center in Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Craiova, Romania.
Gudrun SchuesslerCaritas-Krankenhaus, Bad Mergentheim, Germany.
Christoph F DietrichCaritas-Krankenhaus, Bad Mergentheim, Germany.
University of Craiova · ROTongji Hospital · CNHuazhong University of Science and Technology · CNKrankenhaus Märkisch-Oderland · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesGastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) represent the largest group of subepithelial tumors (SET) of the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract. They may show malignant behavior, in contrast to other SET. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is frequently used to characterize SET. With the introduction of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) into EUS (CE-EUS), distinct enhancement patterns can be detected. In the presented study, the characteristic features of CE-EUS in GIST are analyzed and compared with those of other SET. MATERIALS AND

methodsConsecutive patients from four centers with SET of the upper and middle GI tract were included and received endoscopic or transcutaneous CEUS. The results were compared with EUS-guided tissue acquisition, forceps biopsy, or surgical resection.

resultsForty-two out of 62 (68%) patients had SET of the stomach, 17/62 (27%) of the small intestine, 2/62 (3%) of the esophagus, and 1/62 (2%) extraintestinal. Eighty-one percent underwent surgery. Leiomyoma was found in 5/62 (8%) and GIST in 57/62 patients (92%). Thirty-nine out of 57 (68%) patients had GIST lesions in the stomach, 17/57 (30%) had GIST of the small intestine, and 1/57 (2%) patients had extraintestinal GISTs. GIST size was 62.6 ± 42.1 (16-200) mm. Hyperenhancement had a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of 98%, 100%, 100%, 93%, and 98% for the diagnosis of GIST. Fifty out of 57 patients with GIST (88%) showed avascular areas in the center of the lesions.

conclusionCE-EUS and CEUS show hyperenhancement and avascular areas in a high percentage of GIST but not in leiomyoma. Thus, GIST and leiomyoma can be discriminated accurately.

Identifiers

PMID28218202
PMCPMC5331845
OpenAlexW2588005207

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.