ReviewDer Radiologe2018
[Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the diagnostic workup of lymph nodes].
Review in Der Radiologe, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantitative and qualitative analysis of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for differentiating benign and malignant superficial enlarged lymph nodes.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- Multiparametric Ultrasound of Cervical Lymph Node Metastases in Head and Neck Cancer for Planning Non-Surgical Therapy.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Values of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound in Classification and Diagnosis of Common Bile Duct and Superficial Organ Lesions under Compression Algorithm.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2021Article
- The value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound versus shear wave elastography in differentiating benign and malignant superficial lymph node lesions.American journal of translational research · 2021Article
- [Contrast-enhanced ultrasound: Tingling].Der Radiologe · 2018Article
- Comparative study of core needle biopsy and fine needle aspiration in the treatment of metastatic lymph nodes guided by contrast-enhanced ultrasound.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
clinical/methodical issueDaily tasks in sonographic diagnostics include detection and characterization of peripheral and abdominal lymph nodes. STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL
methodsIn addition to the B‑mode methods, color-coded Doppler sonography (CCDS) plays an important role in the evaluation of lymph nodes. METHODICAL INNOVATIONS: Contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) has become a standard procedure in vascular and organ diagnostics. Tissue perfusion can be recorded visually and retrospectively in real time using time-dependent intensity analysis. The contrast agent dosage depends primarily on the location of the lymph nodes and the type and frequency of the transducer. Vascular and tumor cell density, intranodal pressure due to increased vascular permeability and preservation or destruction of the capsule must be taken into account when interpreting the findings. PERFORMANCE: The indication for CEUS results from the B‑mode and CCDS findings and plays an important role especially in the verification of vitality before and after therapy. Uneven or apparently non-perfused areas allow a targeted puncture of vital tumor tissue. ACHIEVEMENTS: Especially in abdominal lymph nodes, CEUS has a high diagnostic reliability. It is not always possible to differentiate between inflamed lymph nodes and lymph nodes altered by lymphoma filtration. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: CEUS helps to better assess the dignity of lymph nodes by visualizing their micro- and macrovascularization. After frustrated puncture, vital areas can be specifically biopsied. CEUS is particularly valuable in assessing the success of therapy.
Indexed as
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.