ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2021
Septic shock due to
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Article
- Two cases of splenic neoplasms with differing imaging findings that required laparoscopic resection for a definitive diagnosis.International journal of surgery case reports · 2022Article
- The role of pulse indicator continuous cardiac output (PiCCO) and critical care ultrasound in volume status assessment during fluid resuscitation for and prognosis of septic shock patients.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEndoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration or biopsy (EUS-FNA or FNB) has become a popular method for diagnosing various lesions of the gastrointestinal tract and surrounding tissue due to the accuracy and safety. To the best of our knowledge, no case report of severe infection after EUS-FNB of a solid lesion in the spleen has been described. Herein, we report a rare case of septic shock after EUS-FNB of a splenic mass. CASE SUMMARY: A 45-year-old male patient presented to the outpatient clinic due to an incidentally detected splenic mass. A definitive diagnosis could not be established based on the abdominal magnetic resonance imaging. EUS of the spleen showed a 6 cm-sized, relatively well-demarcated, heterogeneous mass, and EUS-FNB with a 22G needle was performed. Ten days after the procedure patient developed septic shock and a splenic abscess was identified. Blood culture revealed growth of
conclusionInfection of a splenic mass after EUS-FNB is a rare complication and prophylactic antibiotics might be considered.
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.