ReviewEndoscopic ultrasound
What should be known prior to performing EUS?
Review in Endoscopic ultrasound. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors influencing the patient experience of gastrointestinal endoscopic ultrasound: a Swedish cross-sectional study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Prognostic and Predicted Significance of FENDRR in Colon and Rectum Adenocarcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Do we need contrast agents for EUS?Endoscopic ultrasoundReview
- How to perform EUS-guided tattooing?Endoscopic ultrasoundReview
- Controversies in EUS.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
- General principles of image optimization in EUS.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
- EUS-guided placement of fiducial markers for image-guided radiotherapy in gastrointestinal tumors: A critical appraisal.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
- What should be known prior to performing EUS exams? (Part II).Endoscopic ultrasoundReview
- Training and certification of EUS operators in China.Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
- Routine esophagogastroduodenoscopy before upper endoscopic ultrasound for non-luminal indications: clinical value and findings from a large single-center experience.Annals of gastroenterologyArticle
- Controversies in endobronchial ultrasound.Endoscopic ultrasoundReview
- Device failures and patient adverse events from EUS: 26-year FDA MAUDE analysis (2000-2025).Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
- Controversies in EUS: Do we need miniprobes?Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
- Do we need elastography for EUS?Endoscopic ultrasoundReview
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
34 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Direct referral of patients for EUS - instead of preprocedural consultation with the endosonographer - has become standard practice (like for other endoscopic procedures) as it is time- and cost-effective. To ensure appropriate indications and safe examinations, the endosonographer should carefully consider what information is needed before accepting the referral. This includes important clinical data regarding relevant comorbidities, the fitness of the patient to consent and undergo the procedure, and the anticoagulation status. In addition, relevant findings from other imaging methods to clarify the clinical question may be necessary. Appropriate knowledge and management of the patients' anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy, antibiotic prophylaxis, and sedation issues can avoid unnecessary delays and unsafe procedures. Insisting on optimal preparation, appropriate indications, and clear clinical referral questions will increase the quality of the outcomes of EUS. In this paper, important practical issues regarding EUS preparations are raised and discussed from different points of view.
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.