SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2020
Diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography in predicting the malignancy potential of submucosal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07106411 (Contrast-Enhanced Harmonic Endoscopic Ultrasound for the Differential Diagnosis Between Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors and Leiomyomas), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Contrast-Enhanced Harmonic Endoscopic Ultrasound for the Differential Diagnosis Between Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors and Leiomyomas: A Multicenter Prospective Self-Controlled Study
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Practice Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Subepithelial Lesion Observed in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2026Guideline
- Endoscopic full-thickness resection of upper gastrointestinal stromal tumors: a retrospective study from a large tertiary hospital in China.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Contrast-Enhanced Harmonic Endoscopic Ultrasonography for Diagnosing Gastric Subepithelial Tumors.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Small Intestine Tumors: Diagnostic Role of Multiparametric Ultrasound.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Practice Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Subepithelial Lesions Observed in Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.The Korean journal of helicobacter and upper gastrointestinal research · 2025Review
- Ultrasound elastography for the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant gastrointestinal stromal tumors.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Neoplasms in the Nasal Cavity Identified and Tracked with an Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Nasal Endoscopic Diagnostic System.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) compared to submucosal tunnel endoscopic resection (STER) for treatment of gastric gastrointestinal stromal tumors.Endoscopy international open · 2023Article
- Controversies in EUS: Do we need miniprobes?Endoscopic ultrasoundArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesContrast-enhanced harmonic endoscopic ultrasonography (CH-EUS) utilizes the second-harmonic signals from contrast microbubbles located in the vessels to improve the detectability of microcirculation. Many studies have used CH-EUS to stratify the malignancy risk of submucosal tumors (SMTs), discriminate gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) from benign SMTs, and predict the malignancy of GISTs based on the regularity of vessels or enhancing patterns. The aim of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate the diagnostic performance of CH-EUS in the differential diagnosis of SMTs.
methodsAfter searching the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases systematically, studies that evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of CH-EUS for the prediction of the malignancy potential of SMTs were pooled. The diagnostic accuracy was computed using a stochastic effect model. The overall test performance was summarized with the summary receiver operating characteristic curve.
resultsSix studies discriminated GISTs from benign lesions, and three studies discriminated low-risk from high-risk GISTs, covering a total of 354 cases of SMT. The overall accuracy of CH-EUS in predicting malignancy risk can be assessed as follows: sensitivity 0.87 (95% CI 0.82-0.91), specificity 0.82 (95% CI 0.74-0.89), positive likelihood ratio of 3.55 (95% CI 2.39-5.27), negative likelihood ratio of 0.21 (95% CI 0.13-0.33), and diagnostic odds ratio of 22.17 (95% CI 10.43-47.10). The overall area under the curve was 0.89. Subgroup analysis of the sensitivity and specificity for studies discriminating low-risk from high-risk GISTs were 0.93 (95% CI 0.77-0.99) and 0.81 (95% CI 0.63-0.93), respectively. There was evidence of significant heterogeneity, but no proof of publication bias.
conclusionsCH-EUS is an effective tool for improving the diagnostic accuracy of conventional EUS for discriminating SMTs and is superior to other imaging techniques. However, due to the limited number of well-designed control studies, we should take into consideration the uncertainty of this method when altering a treatment plan.
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.