Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34386605›Full record

ArticleJGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology2021

New strategy for evaluating pancreatic tissue specimens from endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration and surgery.

Seiichiro Fukuhara, Eisuke Iwasaki, Tomohiko Iwano, Yujiro Machida, Hiroki Tamagawa, Shintaro Kawasaki, Takashi Seino, Takahiro Yokose, Yutaka Endo, Kentaro Yoshimura and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 46% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

15 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Seiichiro FukuharaCenter for Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy Keio University School of Medicine Tokyo Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1675-5670
Eisuke IwasakiDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine Keio University School of Medicine Tokyo Japan.
Tomohiko IwanoDepartment of Anatomy and Cell Biology University of Yamanashi Faculty of Medicine Yamanashi Japan.
Yujiro MachidaDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine Keio University School of Medicine Tokyo Japan.
Hiroki TamagawaDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine Keio University School of Medicine Tokyo Japan.
Shintaro KawasakiDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine Keio University School of Medicine Tokyo Japan.
Takashi SeinoDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine Keio University School of Medicine Tokyo Japan.
Takahiro YokoseDepartment of Surgery Keio University School of Medicine Tokyo Japan.
Yutaka EndoDepartment of Surgery Keio University School of Medicine Tokyo Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7187-0124
Kentaro YoshimuraDepartment of Anatomy and Cell Biology University of Yamanashi Faculty of Medicine Yamanashi Japan.
Kazuhiro KashiwagiCenter for Preventive Medicine Keio University School of Medicine Tokyo Japan.
Minoru KitagoDepartment of Surgery Keio University School of Medicine Tokyo Japan.
Haruhiko OgataCenter for Diagnostic and Therapeutic Endoscopy Keio University School of Medicine Tokyo Japan.
Sen TakedaDepartment of Anatomy and Cell Biology University of Yamanashi Faculty of Medicine Yamanashi Japan.
Takanori KanaiDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine Keio University School of Medicine Tokyo Japan.
Keio University · JPUniversity of Yamanashi · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimPreoperative histological evaluation of pancreatic neoplasms is important for guiding the resection strategy and preventing postoperative adverse events. However, conventional endoscopic methods have technical limitations that reduce the accuracy of the histopathological examination. Probe electrospray ionization mass spectrometry (PESI-MS) may be a useful technique for rapidly evaluating small specimens.

methodsThis single-center prospective study included patients with pancreatic neoplasms between October 2018 and December 2019. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) specimens were obtained via endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) and non-neoplastic tissue was obtained via surgery. Specimens were subjected to PESI-MS and the mass spectra were analyzed using partial least squares regression-discriminant analysis.

resultsThe study included 40 patients with 20 nonneoplastic specimens and 19 PDAC specimens (1 case of neuroendocrine carcinoma was omitted). All nonneoplastic specimens were sufficient for PESI-MS analysis, although only 7 of 19 PDAC specimens were sufficient for PESI-MS analysis because of poor sample quality or insufficient quantity (<1 mg). Among the 27 analyzed cases, the mass spectra clearly differentiated between the PDAC and nonneoplastic specimens.

conclusionsThis study revealed that PESI-MS could differentiate between PDAC and nonneoplastic specimens, even in cases where EUS-FNA produced very small specimens.

Indexed as

endoscopic ultrasound‐guided fine needle aspirationpancreatic ductal adenocarcinomaprobe electrospray ionization mass spectrometry

Identifiers

PMID34386605
PMCPMC8341188
OpenAlexW3185118134

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.