Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28344791›Full record

ArticleUnited European gastroenterology journal2017

Differential diagnosis of solid pancreatic masses: contrast-enhanced harmonic (CEH-EUS), quantitative-elastography (QE-EUS), or both?

Julio Iglesias-Garcia, Björn Lindkvist, Jose Lariño-Noia, Ihab Abdulkader-Nallib, J Enrique Dominguez-Muñoz

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in United European gastroenterology journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 88 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Endo-hepatology: Bridging the gap between lumen and liver.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Contrast-enhanced guided endoscopic ultrasound procedures.World journal of gastroenterology · 2024
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) Guided Elastography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Advanced EUS Imaging Techniques.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2022
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Julio Iglesias-GarciaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago (IDIS), University Hospital of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Björn LindkvistInstitute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Jose Lariño-NoiaDepartment of Gastroenterology and Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago (IDIS), University Hospital of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Ihab Abdulkader-NallibDepartment of Pathology, University Hospital of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
J Enrique Dominguez-MuñozDepartment of Gastroenterology and Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago (IDIS), University Hospital of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago · ESUniversidade de Santiago de Compostela · ESUniversity of Gothenburg · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundContrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasound (CEH-EUS) and quantitative-elastography endoscopic ultrasound (QE-EUS) are considered useful tools for the evaluation of solid pancreatic tumors (SPT). The aim of our study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of CEH-EUS, QE-EUS, and the combination of both for the differential diagnosis of SPT.

methodsSixty-two consecutive patients (mean age 64.3 years, range 32-89 years, 44 male) who underwent EUS for the evaluation of SPT were prospectively included. EUS was performed with a linear Pentax-EUS and a Hitachi-Preirus processor. The mass (area A) and a reference area B were selected during QE-EUS, and results expressed as B/A (strain ratio). A strain histogram of the mass was also evaluated. Microvascularization of the tumor was evaluated over 2 min during CEH-EUS after intravenous injection of 4.8 mL SonoVue. Final diagnosis was based on histopathology of surgical specimens or EUS-guided tissue acquisition and clinical follow-up in non-operated cases. Diagnostic accuracy of CEH-EUS, QE-EUS, and their combination was calculated.

resultsMedian size of the masses was 32 mm (range 12-111). Final diagnosis was pancreatic adenocarcinoma (

conclusionThe combination of QE-EUS and CEH-EUS is a useful tool for the differential diagnosis of SPT, giving complementary information. However, this combination does not significantly increase the diagnostic accuracy of either of the techniques performed alone.

Indexed as

endoscopic ultrasoundSolid pancreatic lesionstiffnesstissue acquisitionvascularization

Identifiers

PMID28344791
PMCPMC5349356
OpenAlexW2307934291

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.