ArticleClinical endoscopy2022
Diagnostic Value of Endoscopic Ultrasonography for Common Bile Duct Dilatation without Identifiable Etiology Detected from Cross-Sectional Imaging.
Article in Clinical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and validation of 'Gallbladder-CBD diameter-Age-Liver function score' to determine the need for endoscopic ultrasound in patients with unexplained bile duct dilatation.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Article
- Endoscopic Ultrasonography Helps to Identify Benign Biliary Neurofibroma.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Article
- Diagnostic yield of endoscopic ultrasound in dilated common bile duct with non-diagnostic cross-sectional imaging.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Article
- The Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography and Endoscopic Ultrasound Connection: Unity Is Strength, or the Endoscopic Ultrasonography Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography Concept.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Value of Endoscopic Ultrasonography in Evaluating Unexplained Isolated Common Bile Duct Dilation on Imaging.Clinical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Comparing the efficacy of EUS versus MRCP with ERCP as gold standard in patients presenting with partial biliary obstruction - finding a better diagnostic tool.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimsEndoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) is warranted when cross-sectional imaging demonstrates common bile duct (CBD) dilatation without identifiable causes. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of EUS in CBD dilatation of unknown etiology.
methodsRetrospective review of patients with dilated CBD without definite causes undergoing EUS between 2012 and 2017.
resultsA total of 131 patients were recruited. The mean age was 63.2±14.1 years. The most common manifestation was abnormal liver chemistry (85.5%). The mean CBD diameter was 12.2±4.1 mm. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of EUS-identified pathologies, including malignancy, choledocholithiasis, and benign biliary stricture (BBS), was 0.98 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95-1.00). The AUROC of EUS for detecting malignancy, choledocholithiasis, and BBS was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.85-0.97), 1.00 (95% CI, 1.00-1.00), and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.87-0.99), respectively. Male sex, alanine aminotransferase ≥3× the upper limit of normal (ULN), alkaline phosphatase ≥3× the ULN, and intrahepatic duct dilatation were predictors for pathological obstruction, with odds ratios of 5.46 (95%CI, 1.74-17.1), 5.02 (95% CI, 1.48-17.0), 4.63 (95% CI, 1.1-19.6), and 4.03 (95% CI, 1.37-11.8), respectively.
conclusionEUS provides excellent diagnostic value in identifying the etiology of CBD dilatation detected by cross-sectional imaging.
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.