ArticleTranslational cancer research2022
The diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound versus contrast-enhanced computed tomography for pancreatic carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Correlation between positive biopsy rates and contrast-enhanced ultrasound findings in patients with pancreatic cancer: a retrospective analysis of percutaneous ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Differential Diagnosis of Solid Pancreatic Lesions Using Detective Flow Imaging Endoscopic Ultrasonography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with synchronous and metachronous hepatic metastasis predicted by contrast-enhanced ultrasound.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pancreatic carcinoma is a highly fatal disease, and early diagnosis is of vital importance. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the diagnostic performances of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) against contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) for pancreatic carcinoma, using pathological results or alternative imaging modality as the gold standard. Methods: A thorough search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases. Two investigators selected the studies and extracted the data independently. A bivariate mixed-effects regression model was used to calculate the pooled data. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression were performed to explore the causes of heterogeneity. Results: A total of 1,227 records were identified, of which 7 articles with 588 patients were assessed for eligibility. The overall sensitivity, specificity of CEUS and CECT with their 95% confidential intervals (95% CI) were 0.91 (0.85-0.94) and 0.88 (0.81-0.92), 0.83 (0.70-0.91) and 0.87 (0.73-0.94), respectively. The area under curve (AUC) of CEUS and CECT were 0.94 and 0.93. Subgroup analysis showed CEUS may be good at diagnosing lesions with diameters less than 2 cm. Tumor features, region and study type were the main causes of heterogeneity. Conclusions: CEUS has a satisfying diagnostic performance for pancreatic carcinoma and it has high sensitivity for small pancreatic carcinomas (≤2 cm); besides, it performs well in discriminating pancreatic cancer from chronic pancreatitis. Therefore, CEUS can be a useful supplement to CECT.
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.