Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30880727›Full record

ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound

"Invisible" pancreatic masses identified by EUS by the "ductal cutoff sign".

Kimberly J Fairley, David L Diehl, Amitpal S Johal

Open access · greenAbstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Endoscopic ultrasound. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kimberly J FairleyDepartment of Gastroenterology, Geisinger Health System, Danville, Pennsylvania, USA.
David L DiehlDepartment of Gastroenterology, Geisinger Health System, Danville, Pennsylvania, USA.
Amitpal S JohalDepartment of Gastroenterology, Geisinger Health System, Danville, Pennsylvania, USA.
Geisinger Health System · USGeisinger Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Making a tissue diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma is best accomplished by EUS and fine-needle aspiration (FNA) of the lesion. Typically, a dark, or "hypoechoic" mass will be seen, which presents an obvious target for FNA. For small lesions, computerized tomography (CT) may be negative, but the lesion is still almost always seen on EUS imaging. Rarely, a pancreatic mass will appear isoechoic on EUS imaging. We report three "invisible" pancreatic masses identified only by a cutoff in the pancreatic duct (PD) and/or common bile duct (CBD). No mass, isoechoic or otherwise, was seen. EUS-FNA was performed in the area of ductal narrowing, with a positive identification of adenocarcinoma in these cases.

Indexed as

EUSEUS-FNAfine-needle aspirationoccult malignancypancreatic mass

Identifiers

PMID30880727
PMCPMC6482601
OpenAlexW2921932699

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.