Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30789997›Full record

ReviewDer Radiologe2019

[Differential diagnosis of gallbladder abnormalities : Ultrasound, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging].

H Kopf, W Schima, S Meng

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Radiologe, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

H KopfAbteilung für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Göttlicher Heiland Krankenhaus, Vinzenzgruppe, Wien, Österreich.
W SchimaAbteilung für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Göttlicher Heiland Krankenhaus, Vinzenzgruppe, Wien, Österreich.
S MengRadiologie, KFJ Spital, Wien, Österreich. stefan.meng@muv.ac.at.
Barmherzige Schwestern Krankenhaus Wien · ATKaiser-Franz-Josef-Spital · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

clinical issueDue to the high prevalence of clinically suspected cholecystitis or cholecystolithiasis the gallbladder is one of the organs examined the most by imaging. STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL

methodsIn most clinical settings ultrasound is the primary imaging method because of its wide availability, speed and superior spatial resolution. In cases of ambiguous findings or potential complications computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are used. METHODICAL INNOVATIONS: When specific problems arise these imaging modalities may be enhanced by special techniques, e. g. contrast-enhanced ultrasound or dual-energy CT, and specific MRI sequences. PERFORMANCE: Special variants of cholecystitis, such as xanthogranulomatous cholecystitis and adenomyomatosis, may pose a particularly difficult diagnostic problem as they may resemble other diseases. Sequelae of cholecystolithiasis, such as the Mirizzi syndrome and acute bowel obstruction, may complicate the imaging algorithm as the location and the symptoms shift. Cases of neoplastic diseases of gallbladder cancer and other malignancies require a broad spectrum of imaging modalities. ACHIEVEMENTS: Although the gallbladder can easily be examined with ultrasound, some cases require a more thorough ultrasound examination. In some cases only a combination of multiple imaging modalities yield the diagnosis. Further developments regarding technical issues and the diagnostic algorithm can be expected. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: Ultrasound is the best first imaging modality. In cases of ambiguous findings or clinical complications CT or MRI are recommended.

Indexed as

GallbladderTomography, X-Ray ComputedDiagnosis, DifferentialGallbladder DiseasesMagnetic Resonance ImagingUltrasonographyBile tract diseasesCholecystitisCholecystolithiasisNeoplasmsPolyps

Identifiers

PMID30789997
OpenAlexW2981374381

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.