Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30671657›Full record

ArticleGraefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie2019

Value of ultrasound biomicroscopy in assessment of small masses at medial canthal region.

Qian Chen, Ruiqi Ma, Lu Gan, Hui Ren, Yifei Yuan

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 38% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Qian ChenDepartment of Ophthalmology, Fudan Eye and ENT Hospital, 83 Fen Yang Road, Xuhui District, Shanghai, 200031, China.
Ruiqi MaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Fudan Eye and ENT Hospital, 83 Fen Yang Road, Xuhui District, Shanghai, 200031, China.
Lu GanDepartment of Ophthalmology, Fudan Eye and ENT Hospital, 83 Fen Yang Road, Xuhui District, Shanghai, 200031, China.
Hui RenDepartment of Ophthalmology, Fudan Eye and ENT Hospital, 83 Fen Yang Road, Xuhui District, Shanghai, 200031, China.
Yifei YuanDepartment of Ophthalmology, Fudan Eye and ENT Hospital, 83 Fen Yang Road, Xuhui District, Shanghai, 200031, China. yuanyifei38626@sina.com.
Eye & ENT Hospital of Fudan University · CNFudan University · CN

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 81800867
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeConventional imaging techniques are not sensitive enough to reveal detailed structures of lacrimal drainage system (LDS) and its surrounding tissue (ST). Our study aimed to explore utility of ultrasound biomicroscopy (UBM) in assessment of small masses at the medial canthal region and compare performance of UBM with conventional imaging techniques.

methodsWe prospectively recruited cases with small mass (long axis < 1 cm) at the medial canthal region (upper LDS-located area) from June 2017 to October 2018. UBM ± color Doppler flow imaging (CDFI) and conventional imaging techniques (computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and dacryocystography) were conducted by four independent practitioners. Results were analyzed against gold standards with Cohen's kappa test in three aspects including LDS patency, mass location, and presumptive diagnosis. Corresponding gold standards were syringe and dacryocystography, intraoperative findings, and pathological/empirical diagnosis.

resultsSeventy-two cases were recruited, including 20 cases of LDS lesions and 52 cases of ST lesions. Female (odds ratio 7.14) and age ≥ 37 (odds ratio 9.80) were risk factors for LDS lesion, and age range of 15-25 (odds ratio 9.17) was a risk factor for inflammatory ST lesion. In terms of LDS patency, UBM results were reliable for the detection of pre-saccal obstruction (kappa = 0.920), but were not reliable for intra-saccal and post-saccal obstruction (kappa = 0.106). In terms of mass location, the UBM (kappa = 0.766) performed better than conventional techniques (except for dacryocystography) to sort out ST lesions, with sensitivity of 93.8% and specificity of 83.3%. In terms of diagnosis, the UBM (kappa = 0.882) outweighed conventional techniques (except for magnetic resonance imaging) to distinguish cysts from nodules, with sensitivity of 93.8% and specificity of 94.4%. Notably, the UBM + CDFI achieved better performance than the UBM when screen out inflammatory lesions (kappa = 0.926 vs kappa = 0.689) and LDS-adjacent lesions (kappa = 0.815 vs kappa = 0.673), resulting in sensitivity of 91.7% and specificity of 100% for both testing items. If deep lesions (at the lacrimal sac-harbored area) were excluded, UBM reliability to detect inflammatory lesions (kappa = 0.915) and LDS-adjacent lesions (kappa = 0.770) improved, achieving sensitivity of 90.0% and 88.9%, and specificity of 100.0% and 92.7%, respectively.

conclusionsThe UBM is a valuable tool to assess superficial masses at the medial canthal region regarding pre-saccal obstruction, mass location, and presumptive diagnosis.

trial registrationThis work was registered on Chinese Clinical Trial Registry website with registration number ChiCTR1800018956 .

Indexed as

Microscopy, AcousticAdolescentAdultChildChild, PreschoolEyelid DiseasesFemaleHumansLacrimal ApparatusLacrimal Apparatus DiseasesMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and SpecificityColor Doppler flow imagingLacrimal drainage systemMedial canthusUltrasound biomicroscopy

Identifiers

PMID30671657
OpenAlexW2913950971

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.