ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2021
Endoscopic Ultrasound Elastography in the Assessment of Rectal Tumors: How Well Does It Work in Clinical Practice?
Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- D3 lymph node dissection improves perioperative outcomes and overall survival in patients with cT2N0 colorectal cancer.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Endorectal ultrasound applications in the evaluation of rectal tumors could be a useful tool in achieving proper staging of rectal cancer. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of rectal tumor staging by flexible endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) with real-time elastography (RTE) using the gold standard post-surgery histological analysis of the resected tissue as the control. The second aim of our research was to establish cutoff values for the EUS-RTE strain ratio corresponding to stages by independently comparing the stiffness values obtained with histology and EUS-RTE staging in order to minimize observation bias. We evaluated the records of 130 patients with a rectal tumor confirmed by biopsy. EUS was used in 70 patients, EUS-RTE-in the other 60. We found no statistically significant differences in staging accuracy when comparing EUS to EUS-RTE. Through a correspondence method between staging assessment and the EUS-RTE stain ratio, we identified cutoff intervals for T2, T3, and T4 staging that were nonoverlapping and proved to be statistically significant in terms of EUS-RTE values (significantly different ascending values from one interval to the other). We found that EUS-RTE offers slightly better, although not statistically significant sensitivity and specificity for T and N stage predictions compared to 2D EUS. Our results showed that EUS-RTE offers slightly higher sensitivity and specificity compared to EUS. Reliable cutoff intervals were found for strain rate elastography, previously available only for shear wave elastography (SWE) which is currently unavailable on any EUS system. Thus, these commonly available EUS-RTE systems can serve as a complementary tool in the staging of rectal tumors.
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.