Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33447604›Full record

ReviewVisceral medicine2020

Update in Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound.

Steffen Beckmann, Jörg H Simanowski

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Visceral medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Biliary atresia-related liver fibrosis.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Choroidal metastatic mucinous abscess caused byWorld journal of clinical cases · 2021
    Article
  13. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Steffen BeckmannPractices Lachem, Hessisch-Oldendorf, Germany.
Jörg H SimanowskiClinic for General, Visceral, Vascular and Obesity Surgery and Interdisciplinary Emergency Center of the Nordstadt Clinic of the Hannover Region Clinic, Hannover, Germany.
BDH-Klinik Hessisch Oldendorf · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of modern medicine is to safely classify diseases for successful therapy without invasive measures. Sonography, computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are potent imaging techniques. However, without contrast medium, the informative value of the 3 native methods is limited. The advantages of sonography are: no radiation exposure or previously known physically harmful interactions with tissue, proportionate disappearance of a contrast agent risk, no (probably irreversible) contrast agent deposits, and no risk of renal insufficiency. But, is that enough to compete with of even exceed CT and MRI? SUMMARY: In this review, the state of the art of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in the abdominal cavity is presented. The remarkable diagnostic possibilities can unfortunately only be demonstrated here in a small number of impressive, typical case studies underpinned by the literature, so that, from one's own perspective, the full spectrum of CEUS can be used by oneself or initiated. Within the limits of physics, the real-time dynamics of CEUS enable conclusions to be drawn, so that with the current technology, sonography, including expansion by contrast, can be considered superior to other imaging methods. It is not uncommon for CEUS to have the value of a control and reference method. KEY MESSAGES: Sonography very often enables reliable diagnostics. The introduction of a contrast agent in sonography has led to a quantum leap similar to that of other imaging techniques. Already natively, the real-time representation of dynamic events leads to a certain superiority, i.e., complete observation of the inflow and outflow phases of the contrast medium and the resulting diagnostic; tissue-specific differentiation options provide a unique selling point. Further advantages of the first-choice imaging diagnostic method are: a lack of radiation exposure, repeatability of the examination at any time, local independence, a negligible allergy rate compared to the contrast agents of other methods, and a lack of kidney and thyroid exposure or excluded deposits.

Indexed as

AbdomenEcho contrast sonographyImagingUltrasonographyUltrasound

Identifiers

PMID33447604
PMCPMC7768106
OpenAlexW3107369224

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.