Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34589706›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic advances in gastrointestinal endoscopy

Management of pancreatic cysts and guidelines: what the gastroenterologist needs to know.

Ross C D Buerlein, Vanessa M Shami

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic advances in gastrointestinal endoscopy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Rare tumours of the pancreas: monocentric study.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2024
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ross C D BuerleinUniversity of Virginia Digestive Health, Charlottesville, VA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1033-9783
Vanessa M ShamiUniversity of Virginia Digestive Health, 1215 Lee Street, Charlottesville, VA 22903, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7528-5141
University of Virginia · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The prevalence of pancreatic cysts has increased significantly over the last decade, partly secondary to increased quality and frequency of cross-sectional imaging. While the majority never progress to cancer, a small number will and need to be followed. The management of pancreatic cysts can be both confusing and intimidating due to the multiple guidelines with varying recommendations. Despite the differences in the specifics of the guidelines, they all agree on several high-risk features that should get the attention of any clinician when assessing a pancreatic cyst: presence of a mural nodule or solid component, dilation of the main pancreatic duct (or presence of main duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm), pancreatic cyst size ⩾3-4 cm, or positive cytology on pancreatic cyst fluid aspiration. Other important criteria to consider include rapid cyst growth (⩾5 mm/year), elevated serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels, new-onset diabetes mellitus, or acute pancreatitis thought to be related to the cystic lesion.

Indexed as

mucinous cystic neoplasmspancreatic cystpancreatic cyst guidelinespancreatic cystic neoplasmspancreatic cystic tumorspancreatic neoplasia

Identifiers

PMID34589706
PMCPMC8474323
OpenAlexW3204837456

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.