Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33807558›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2021

Diagnosis of Pancreatic Solid Lesions, Subepithelial Lesions, and Lymph Nodes Using Endoscopic Ultrasound.

Akashi Fujita, Shomei Ryozawa, Masafumi Mizuide, Yuki Tanisaka, Tomoya Ogawa, Masahiro Suzuki, Hiromune Katsuda, Yoichi Saito, Tomoaki Tashima, Kazuya Miyaguchi and 3 more

Abstract 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 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Diagnostic value of endoscopic ultrasound in staging of pancreatic cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

13 authors.

Akashi FujitaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-9475-0512
Shomei RyozawaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-4128-9990
Masafumi MizuideDepartment of Gastroenterology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.
Yuki TanisakaDepartment of Gastroenterology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-2765-3306
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.
Yoichi SaitoDepartment 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.
Kazuya MiyaguchiDepartment of Gastroenterology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.
Eiichi AraiDepartment of Pathology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.
Tomonori KawasakiDepartment of Pathology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.
Yumi MashimoDepartment of Gastroenterology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1, Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama 350-1298, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Currently, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has become widely accepted and has considerable advantages over computed tomography (CT) and other imaging modalities, given that it enables echostructure assessment in lesions with <1 cm diameter and permits high resolution imaging. EUS-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) provides consistent results under ultrasound guidance and has been considered more effective compared to CT- or ultrasound-guided lesion biopsy. Moreover, complication rates, including pancreatitis and bleeding, have been extremely low, with <1% morbidity and mortality rates, thereby suggesting the exceptional overall safety of EUS-TA. The aggressive use of EUS for various lesions has been key in facilitating early diagnosis and therapy. This review summarizes the diagnostic ability of EUS for pancreatic solid lesions, subepithelial lesions, and lymph nodes where it is mainly used. EUS has played an important role in diagnosing these lesions and planning treatment strategies. Future developments in EUS imaging technology, such as producing images close to histopathological findings, are expected to further improve its diagnostic ability. Moreover, tissue acquisition via EUS is expected to be used for precision medicine, which facilitates the selection of an appropriate therapeutic agent by increasing the amount of tissue collected and improving genetic analysis.

Indexed as

diagnostic accuracyendoscopic ultrasoundendoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspirationfine-needle biopsylymphadenopathylymph nodespancreatic solid lesionssubepithelial lesions

Identifiers

PMID33807558
PMCPMC7961381

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.