ReviewDer Pathologe2021
[Preoperative diagnostics of pancreatic neoplasms].
Review in Der Pathologe, 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic methods for pancreatic cancer and their clinical applications (Review).Oncology letters · 2025Review
- [Challenges of cytopathological pancreas diagnostics].Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Review
- Prediction of postoperative liver metastasis in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma based on multiparametric magnetic resonance radiomics combined with serological markers: a cohort study of machine learning.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Article
- [Pancreatic cystic space-occupying lesions-Diagnostics, treatment and follow-up care : Current recommendations taking the current German S3 guidelines on pancreatic cancer into account].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While patients with clinico-radiologically diagnosed resectable pancreatic cancer usually undergo surgery without preoperative cytological or histopathological diagnostics, patients with inoperable tumors or ambiguous findings in imaging often undergo EUS-FNA or EUS-FNB (endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration or endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy). In many cases, this concerns pancreatic cystic lesions, which can range from benign inflammatory pseudocysts to invasive pancreatic cancer emerging from intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) or mucinous cystic neoplasms (MCNs). However, the evaluation of EUS-FNA material can be especially hampered by contamination with gastric or enteric cells or mucin, degenerative changes, or low or even no cellularity of the sample. Next-generation-sequencing-based molecular analyses, especially of cystic lesions, can significantly increase the accuracy of EUS-FNA diagnostics of the pancreas. Interpretation of morphological and molecular data considering each case's clinico-radiological context is crucial. While reliable molecular markers for the detection of mucinous and specific nonmucinous pancreatic neoplasms already exist, establishing valid markers for the detection of high-grade lesions is an urgent future goal.
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.