ArticleDigestive diseases and sciences2018
Evaluation of the International Consensus Guidelines for the Surgical Resection of Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms.
Article in Digestive diseases and sciences, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Multiphase computed tomography radiomics of pancreatic intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms to predict malignancy.World journal of gastroenterology · 2020Article
- Detecting Early Pancreatic Cancer: Current Problems and Future Prospects.Gut and liver · 2020Review
- Concise Commentary: Presurgical Evaluation of IPMNs-Eight Is Enough.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInternational consensus guidelines for intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) were revised in 2012.
aimsWe aimed to evaluate the clinical utility of each predictor in the 2006 and 2012 guidelines and validate the diagnostic value and surgical indications.
methodsForty-two patients with surgically resected IPMNs were included. Each predictor was applied to evaluate its diagnostic value.
resultsThe 2012 guidelines had greater accuracy for invasive carcinoma than the 2006 guidelines (64.3 vs. 31.0%). Moreover, the accuracy for high-grade dysplasia was also increased (48.6 vs. 77.1%). When the main pancreatic duct (MPD) size ≥8 mm was substituted for MPD size ≥10 mm in the 2012 guidelines, the accuracy for high-grade dysplasia was 80.0%.
conclusionsThe 2012 guidelines exhibited increased diagnostic accuracy for invasive IPMN. It is important to consider surgical resection prior to invasive carcinoma, and high-risk stigmata might be a useful diagnostic criterion. Furthermore, MPD size ≥8 mm may be predictive of high-grade dysplasia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28667432What 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.