ArticleCancer management and research2020
Comparative Diagnostic Evaluation with Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound, Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients with Pancreatic Cystic Neoplasms.
Article in Cancer management and research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transabdominal ultrasound subclassification of pancreatic serous cystic neoplasms: correlation with MRI and characterization of subtype-specific features.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Current Endoscopic and Surgical Management of Pancreatic Cystic Lesions: A Comprehensive Review.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2024Review
- Can cereal-based oral contrast agents-assisted ultrasound become an alternative to non-contrast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in radiological follow-up for pancreatic cystic lesions?Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- DenseNet model incorporating hybrid attention mechanisms and clinical features for pancreatic cystic tumor classification.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2024Article
- Review
- Focal Pancreatic Lesions: Role of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Automated Detection of Pancreatic Cystic Lesions on CT Using Deep Learning.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Update in Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound.Visceral medicine · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of our study was to evaluate the role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT) in the pathological diagnosis of pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs).
methodsA total of 90 patients (66 women, 24 men) aged 18-71 years were studied prospectively. CEUS was performed in all patients, whereas MRI was performed in 85 patients and CT in 69 patients. We analyzed the sensitivity and accuracy of these three imaging modalities to diagnose the PCNs. Neoplasm size, location, shape, intralesional mural nodules, septa and duct dilatation were also assessed by different radiologists.
resultsThere were no significant differences in sensitivity for discriminating PCNs from pancreatic cystic lesions between CEUS and MRI (p=0.614) or between CEUS and CT (p=0.479). The diagnostic accuracy of CEUS for classifying PCNs was 64.4% (58/90), which was higher than that of CT (53.6%, 37/69, P=0.017), and lower than that of MRI (70.6%, 60/85, p=0.791). Regarding tumor size for lesions larger than 3 cm, CEUS was superior to CT in differentiating the specific type of PCN (p=0.041), and CEUS had the same value as MRI (p=0.774). Furthermore, CEUS is valuable for precisely characterizing internal structures, for instance, septa (p=0.003, compared with CT; p=0.443, compared with MRI) and nodules (p= 0.018, compared with CT; p=0.033, compared with MRI). The number of septa (p=0.033) and cyst morphology (p=0.016) were meaningful indicators in differentiating serous and mucinous adenoma. There was no significant difference in evaluating size and detecting duct dilatation among the three imaging methods.
conclusionCEUS compares favorably with MRI in displaying the inner structure of PCNs and offers advantages over CT. CEUS can contribute in an important way to the diagnosis of pancreatic cystic neoplasms.
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.