ArticleEuropean radiology2022
Clinical value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound enhancement patterns for differentiating solid pancreatic lesions.
Article in European radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identifying a better-prognosis pancreatic cancer from its benign inflammatory mimic: a machine learning approach with contrast-enhanced ultrasound for early intervention.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- A Preliminary Study on Contrast Enhanced Ultrasound Characteristics of Solid Pseudopapillary Neoplasms and Pancreatoblastoma in Children.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a nomogram model based on ultrasound and contrast-enhanced ultrasound features for differentiating mass-forming pancreatitis and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Article
- Operative Procedures for Ultrasound Assessment of Extracranial Artery Disease: A Narrative Review by the Italian Society for Vascular Investigation (SIDV).Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound with time-intensity curve analysis for differentiating hypovascular solid pancreatic lesions.European radiology · 2023Article
- Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with synchronous and metachronous hepatic metastasis predicted by contrast-enhanced ultrasound.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the diagnostic performance of the EFSUMB CEUS Pancreatic Applications guidelines (2017 version): a retrospective single-center analysis of 455 solid pancreatic masses.European radiology · 2022Article
- Development and validation of an ultrasound-based prediction model for differentiating between malignant and benign solid pancreatic lesions.European radiology · 2022Article
- The diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound versus contrast-enhanced computed tomography for pancreatic carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Translational cancer research · 2022Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo explore the diagnostic value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) enhancement patterns for differentiating solid pancreatic lesions and compare them with conventional ultrasound (US) and enhanced computed tomography (CT).
methodsA total of 210 patients with solid pancreatic lesions who had definite pathological or clinical diagnoses were enrolled. Six CEUS enhancement patterns were proposed for solid pancreatic lesions. Two US doctors blindly observed the CEUS patterns of solid pancreatic lesions and the interrater agreement was analyzed. The diagnostic value of CEUS enhancement patterns for differentiating solid pancreatic lesions was evaluated, and the diagnostic accuracy was compared with that of US and enhanced CT.
resultsThere was good concordance for six CEUS enhancement patterns of solid pancreatic lesions between the two doctors, with a kappa value of 0.767. Hypo-enhancement (Hypo-E) or centripetal enhancement (Centri-E) as the diagnostic criteria for pancreatic carcinoma had an accuracy of 87.62%; hyper-enhancement (Hyper-E) for neuroendocrine tumors had an accuracy of 92.89%; capsular enhancement with low or uneven enhancement inside the tumor (Capsular-E) for solid pseudopapillary tumors had an accuracy of 97.63%; and iso-enhancement (Iso-E) or iso-enhancement with focal hypo-enhancement (Iso-fhypo-E) for focal pancreatitis had an accuracy of 89.10%. The diagnostic accuracy of CEUS was significantly different from that of US for 210 cases of solid pancreatic lesions (p < 0.05) and was not significantly different from that of enhanced CT for 146 cases of solid pancreatic lesions (p > 0.05).
conclusionsThe different enhancement patterns of solid pancreatic lesions on CEUS were clinically valuable for differentiation. KEY POINTS: • Six CEUS enhancement (E) patterns, including Hyper-E, Iso-E, Iso-fhypo-E, Hypo-E, Centri-E, and Capsular-E, are proposed for the characterization of solid pancreatic lesions. • Using Hypo-E or Centri-E as the diagnostic criteria for pancreatic carcinoma, Hyper-E for neuroendocrine tumors, Capsular-E for solid pseudopapillary tumors, and Iso-E or Iso-fhypo-E for focal pancreatitis on CEUS had relatively high diagnostic accuracy. • The diagnostic accuracy of CEUS was greatly increased over that of US and was not different from that of enhanced CT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34716476What 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.