ArticleJournal of ultrasonography2018
3D/4D contrast-enhanced urosonography (ceVUS) in children - is it superior to the 2D technique?
Article in Journal of ultrasonography, 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.
- Renal Ultrasonography in Children: Principles and Emerging Techniques.Current treatment options in pediatrics · 2024Article
- A narrative review on the applications of intracavitary contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in pediatric lower genitourinary anomalies.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Review
- Contrast-enhanced ultrasound: a comprehensive review of safety in children.Pediatric radiology · 2021Review
- Contrast-enhanced voiding urosonography, part 1: vesicoureteral reflux evaluation.Pediatric radiology · 2021Review
- Emerging contrast-enhanced ultrasound applications in children.Pediatric radiology · 2021Review
- Comparison of Real-Time Two-Dimensional and Three-Dimensional Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound to Quantify Flow in an In Vitro Model: A Feasibility Study.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBy now, two-dimensional contrast-enhanced voiding urosonography (ceVUS) has become a well-established method for the diagnosis and treatment monitoring of vesicoureteral reflux in children, particularly after the recent approval for this application in children in the USA and in Europe. The introduction of three-dimensional static (3D) and real-time (4D) techniques with ultrasound contrast agents opens up new diagnostic opportunities for this imaging modality.
objectiveTo analyze whether 3D and 4D ceVUS is a superior technique compared to standard 2D ceVUS in diagnosing vesicoureteral reflux in children. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe study included 150 patients (mean age 3.7 years) who underwent 2D and 3D/4D ceVUS for the diagnosis and grading of vesicoureteral reflux.
results2D ceVUS and 3D/4D ceVUS diagnosed the same number of vesicoureteral refluxes, however, there was a statistically significant difference in grading between the two methods. Performing 3D/4D ceVUS resulted in changing the initial grade compared to 2D ceVUS in 19 out of 107 refluxing units (17.76%) diagnosed. The 4D technique enabled a more conspicuous visualization of vesicoureteral reflux than the 3D technique.
conclusions2D ceVUS and 3D/4D ceVUS diagnosed the same number of vesicoureteral refluxes, however, there was a statistically significant difference in grading between the two methods. Thus 3D/4D ceVUS appears at least a valid, if not even a more conspicuous technique compared to 2D ceVUS.
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.