ArticleWorld journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy2020
Role of endoscopic ultrasound in pediatric patients: A single tertiary center experience and review of the literature.
Article in World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing the safety and effectiveness of endoscopic ultrasound for pediatric hepato-pancreatico-biliary disorders: a systematic review.Pediatric radiology · 2025Pooled it
- The application of gastrointestinal endoscopy in children: a narrative review.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Review
- Endoscopic Ultrasound for Diagnosis and Management of Pediatric Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor.JPGN reports · 2022Article
- Usefulness of endoscopic ultrasound in children with pancreatobiliary and gastrointestinal symptoms.Endoscopy international open · 2022Article
- EUS in Pediatrics: A Multicenter Experience and Review.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2021Article
- EUS in pediatric patients.Endoscopic ultrasoundReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is now widely available and has an established role in adults, the utility of EUS and EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) in pediatrics is insufficiently described compared to adults and is supported by only a few studies.
aimTo report the experience of a single tertiary center in the use of EUS and EUS-FNA in a pediatric population and to further assess its safety, feasibility, and clinical impact on management.
methodsA retrospective study of 13 children (aged 18 years or younger) identified from our medical database was conducted. A retrospective review of demographic data, procedure indications, EUS findings, and the clinical impact of EUS on the subsequent management of these patients was performed.
resultsDuring the 4-year study period, a total of 13 (1.7%) pediatric EUS examinations out of 749 EUS procedures were performed in our unit. The mean age of these 8 females and 5 males was 15.6 years (range: 6-18). Six of the 13 EUS examinations were pancreatobiliary (46.1%), followed by mediastinal 2/13 (15.4%), peri-gastric 2/13 (15.4%), abdominal lymphadenopathy 1/13 (7.7%), tracheal 1/13 (7.7%) and rectal 1/13 (7.7%). Overall, EUS-FNA was performed in 7 patients (53.8%) with a diagnostic yield of 100%. The EUS results had a significant impact on clinical care in 10/13 (77%) cases. No complications occurred in these patients during or after any of the procedures.
conclusionEUS and EUS-FNA in the pediatric population are safe, feasible, and have a significant clinical impact on the subsequent management; thus avoiding invasive and unnecessary procedures.
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.