Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29941723›Full record

ReviewEndoscopic ultrasound

A quarter century of EUS-FNA: Progress, milestones, and future directions.

Irina Mihaela Cazacu, Adriana Alexandra Luzuriaga Chavez, Adrian Saftoiu, Peter Vilmann, Manoop S Bhutani

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Endoscopic ultrasound. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Patients' Knowledge About the Endoscopic UltrasoundGuided Fine Needle Aspiration of Pancreas Is Not Enough.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2023
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

5 authors.

Irina Mihaela CazacuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Research Center of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Craiova, Romania; Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Texas - MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Adriana Alexandra Luzuriaga ChavezDepartment of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Texas - MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Adrian SaftoiuDepartment of Gastroenterology, Research Center of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Craiova, Romania.
Peter VilmannGastrounit, Division of Surgery, Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Manoop S BhutaniDepartment of Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition, University of Texas - MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tissue acquisition using EUS has considerably evolved since the first EUS-FNA was reported 25 years ago. Its introduction was an important breakthrough in the endoscopic field. EUS-FNA has now become a part of the diagnostic and staging algorithm for the evaluation of benign and malignant diseases of the gastrointestinal tract and of the organs in its proximity, including lung diseases. This review aims to present the history of EUS-FNA development and to provide a perspective on the recent developments in procedural techniques and needle technologies that have significantly extended the role of EUS and its clinical applications. There is a bright future ahead for EUS-FNA in the years to come as extensive research is conducted in this field and various technologies are continuously implemented into clinical practice.

Indexed as

EUSEUS-FNAtissue acquisition

Identifiers

PMID29941723
PMCPMC6032705

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.