ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound
New criteria to differentiate between mucinous cystic neoplasm and serous cystic neoplasm in pancreas by endoscopic ultrasound: A preliminarily confirmed outcome of 41 patients.
Article in Endoscopic ultrasound. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deep Learning-Based Differentiation between Mucinous Cystic Neoplasm and Serous Cystic Neoplasm in the Pancreas Using Endoscopic Ultrasonography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Endoscopic ultrasonography for the evaluation of pancreatic cystic neoplasms.Journal of medical ultrasonics (2001) · 2020Review
- Surveillance and management for serous cystic neoplasms of the pancreas based on total hazards-a multi-center retrospective study from China.Annals of translational medicine · 2019Article
- A prospective study on endoscopic ultrasound for the differential diagnosis of serous cystic neoplasms and mucinous cystic neoplasms.BMC gastroenterology · 2019Article
- Glycopatterns and Glycoproteins Changes in MCN and SCN: A Prospective Cohort Study.BioMed research international · 2019Article
- An international, multi-institution survey of the use of EUS in the diagnosis of pancreatic cystic lesions.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
- Pancreatic cystic neoplasms in 2018: The final cut.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
- EUS-FNA in cystic pancreatic lesions: Where are we now and where are we headed in the future?Endoscopic ultrasoundReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe ability to distinguish between mucinous cystic neoplasm (MCN) and serous cystic neoplasm (SCN) in the pancreas preoperatively by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) remains a clinical challenge. To address this problem, we have developed new criteria using EUS findings and cyst fluid carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) in the clinic. In this study, the validity and reliability of these criteria were assessed. MATERIALS AND
methodsBetween April of 2015 and May of 2016, a total of 59 patients with pancreatic cystic neoplasms underwent EUS and ultimately received surgery in our hospital. Of the 59 patients, 21 were pathologically verified to have MCN while 20 were verified to have SCN in the pancreas. For these 41 patients with MCN or SCN, EUS findings and cyst fluid CEA were reviewed.
resultsFor the 41 patients reviewed, the new criteria were found to identify MCN with 85.71% sensitivity (95% confidence interval [CI], 64%-97%), 80.00% specificity (CI, 56%-94%), and 82.93% accuracy (CI, 68%-93%).
conclusionThese new criteria were preliminarily found to produce excellent results, with 82.93% accuracy determined for the differential diagnosis between MCN and SCN by EUS. However, a further prospective study with a larger population must be carried out to fully assess these new criteria.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.