ArticleClinical endoscopy2019
Diagnostic Efficacy of Endoscopic Ultrasound Elastography in Differentiating Solid Pancreatic Lesions: A Single-Center Experience.
Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2019. 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.
- Endoscopic ultrasound elastography in solid pancreatic lesions: individual and combined performance of strain ratio, fat-lesion strain ratio, and mean strain histogram for diagnosing pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2025Article
- Cystic tumors of the pancreas: Current perspectives on diagnosis and management.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Review
- The expanding role of endoscopic ultrasound elastography.Clinical journal of gastroenterology · 2022Review
- Endoscopic ultrasound elastography for malignant pancreatic masses and associated lymph nodes: Critical evaluation of strain ratio cutoff value.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2022Article
- Role of Endoscopic Ultrasonography and Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in the Diagnosis of Pancreatic Cancer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsEndoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has a limited ability to determine the nature of solid pancreatic lesions (SPLs). Most recent ultrasound processors are provided with elastography software, which allows quantification of the tissue hardness. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the elasticity score (ES) and strain ratio (SR) in the differentiation of benign pancreatic lesions from malignant pancreatic lesions.
methodsThe study had a retrospective design; it included 97 patients with SPLs and 19 patients with inflammatory lesions. The ES and SR were determined during the examination; finally, EUS-guided fine needle aspiration was performed.
resultsIn this 2-year study, 116 patients were enrolled (97 with malignant lesions and 19 with benign lesions). There were 69 men and 47 women. Their median age was 55.9 years. A cut-off point was detected at SR of 7.75 with a specificity of 99.9%, sensitivity of 90.7%, positive predictive value (PPV) of 99.9%, negative predictive value (NPV) of 67.9%, and accuracy of 92.2%. After adding the ES to the SR, the cut-off point at 7.75 resulted in a specificity of 94.6%, sensitivity of 99%, PPV of 98%, NPV of 98.5%, and accuracy of 97%.
conclusionThe use of the ES combined with the SR increases the accuracy of differentiation between benign and malignant SPLs and is an effective method for the evaluation of pancreatic masses.
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.