ArticleQatar medical journal2021
Role of endoscopic ultrasound elastography in differential diagnosis of pancreatic solid masses.
Article in Qatar medical journal, 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.
- Risk Factor Analysis of Hepatic Encephalopathy and the Establishment of Diagnostic Model.BioMed research international · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEndoscopic ultrasound (EUS) elastography is another technique that measures the stiffness of tissue and adds more diagnostic value to EUS.
objectiveThis study aimed to assess the ability of qualitative and quantitative EUS elastography in differentiating malignant from benign solid pancreatic masses.
methodsThis 2-year cross-sectional study enrolled 80 patients with solid pancreatic masses in the department of endoscopy in Alassad University Hospital who underwent conventional and elastography-assisted EUS and then followed for pathology through EUS-guided or CT-guided biopsy or surgery.
resultsQualitative elastography using a 5-point scoring system was able to recognize malignant pathology (obtained by EUS-guided biopsy, CT-guided biopsy, or surgery) with a sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy rates of 100%, 28.6%, and 81.3%, respectively. A quantitative method using hue histogram had a sensitivity of 71.2%-86.4% and specificity of 71.4%-81% with the best accuracy for histogram mean ratio (area under the curve, 0.867).
conclusionEUS elastography is a simple and good alternative method in differentiating malignant from benign pancreatic solid masses.
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.