Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29218619›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2018

Cervical ultrasonography has no additional value over negative

Lucas Goense, Jihane Meziani, Peter S N van Rossum, Frank J Wessels, Marnix G E H Lam, Richard van Hillegersberg, Jelle P Ruurda

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Cervical lymph node metastases in thoracic esophageal cancer: a systematic review.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Updated evidence on the accuracy ofQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026
    Review
  3. Additional diagnostic value of cervical ultrasound in the detection of cervical lymph node metastases in patients with esophageal cancer.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2026
    Article
  4. 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

7 authors.

Lucas GoenseDepartment of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5824-8736
Jihane MezianiDepartment of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Peter S N van RossumDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Frank J WesselsDepartment of Radiology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Marnix G E H LamDepartment of Nuclear Medicine, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Richard van HillegersbergDepartment of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Jelle P RuurdaDepartment of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584CX, Utrecht, The Netherlands. J.P.Ruurda@umcutrecht.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo investigate the additional value of cervical ultrasonography over

methodsBetween January 2013 and January 2016, 163 patients with newly diagnosed oesophageal cancer underwent both cervical ultrasonography and

resultsThe overall incidence of patients with cervical lymph node metastases was 14%. The sensitivity of

conclusionsCervical ultrasonography has no additional diagnostic value to a negative integrated KEY POINTS: • Cervical ultrasonography has no value over PET/CT in evaluating cervical node metastases. • PET/CT provides greater diagnostic confidence compared to cervical ultrasonography. • Cervical ultrasonography during standard diagnostic work-up may be considered unnecessary. • Cervical lesions on PET/CT require cytopathological confirmation by FNA.

Indexed as

Fluorodeoxyglucose F18RadiopharmaceuticalsAgedEsophageal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansLymphatic MetastasisLymph NodesMaleNeckPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityUltrasonographyFluorodeoxyglucose F18Radiopharmaceuticals18F-FDG positron emission tomography/computed tomographyCancer stagingCervical lymph node metastasesCervical ultrasonographyOesophageal cancer

Identifiers

PMID29218619
PMCPMC5882618

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.