Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33802525›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2021

Diagnostic Process Using Endoscopy for Biliary Strictures: A Narrative Review.

Yuki Tanisaka, Masafumi Mizuide, Akashi Fujita, Tomoya Ogawa, Masahiro Suzuki, Hiromune Katsuda, Youichi Saito, Kazuya Miyaguchi, Tomoaki Tashima, Yumi Mashimo and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Choledochoscopy: An update.World journal of gastrointestinal endoscopy · 2021
    Review
  14. Review
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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yuki TanisakaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-2765-3306
Masafumi MizuideDepartment of Gastroenterology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.
Akashi FujitaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-9475-0512
Tomoya OgawaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.
Masahiro SuzukiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.
Hiromune KatsudaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.
Youichi SaitoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.
Kazuya MiyaguchiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.
Tomoaki TashimaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-4515-5543
Yumi MashimoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.
Shomei RyozawaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-4128-9990
Saitama Medical University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The diagnostic process for biliary strictures remains challenging in some cases. A broad differential diagnosis exists for indeterminate biliary strictures, including benign or malignant lesions. The diagnosis of indeterminate biliary strictures requires a combination of physical examination, laboratory testing, imaging modalities, and endoscopic procedures. Despite the progress of less invasive imaging modalities such as transabdominal ultrasonography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging, endoscopy plays an essential role in the accurate diagnosis, including the histological diagnosis. Imaging findings and brush cytology and/or forceps biopsy under fluoroscopic guidance with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) are widely used as the gold standard for the diagnosis of biliary strictures. However, ERCP cannot provide an intraluminal view of the biliary lesion, and its outcomes are not satisfactory. Recently, peroral cholangioscopy, confocal laser endomicroscopy, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration have been reported as useful for indeterminate biliary strictures. Appropriate endoscopic modalities need to be selected according to the patient's condition, the lesion, and the expertise of the endoscopist. The aim of this review article is to discuss the diagnostic process for indeterminate biliary strictures using endoscopy.

Indexed as

biliary stricturescholangioscopyconfocal laser endomicroscopyendoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographyendoscopic ultrasoundERCPEUSEUS-FNA

Identifiers

PMID33802525
PMCPMC7961606
OpenAlexW3135243321

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.