Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37795347›Full record

ArticleEndoscopic ultrasound

Identification of sentinel lymph nodes in esophageal cancer patients using contrast-enhanced EUS with peritumoral injections.

Ji-Bin Liu, Priscilla Machado, John R Eisenbrey, Sriharsha Gummadi, Flemming Forsberg, Corinne E Wessner, Anand Raman Kumar, Austin Chiang, Anthony Infantolino, Alexander Schlachterman and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Endoscopic ultrasound. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Contrast-enhanced guided endoscopic ultrasound procedures.World journal of gastroenterology · 2024
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ji-Bin LiuDepartment of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA USA.
Priscilla MachadoDepartment of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA USA.
John R EisenbreyDepartment of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA USA.
Sriharsha GummadiDepartment of Surgery, Lankenau Medical Center, Wynnewood, PA, USA.
Flemming ForsbergDepartment of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA USA.
Corinne E WessnerDepartment of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA USA.
Anand Raman KumarDepartment of Medicine, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Austin ChiangDepartment of Medicine, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Anthony InfantolinoDepartment of Medicine, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Alexander SchlachtermanDepartment of Medicine, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Thomas KowalskiDepartment of Medicine, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Robert CobenDepartment of Medicine, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
David LorenDepartment of Medicine, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Thomas Jefferson University · USLankenau Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: The objective of this pilot study was to compare the performance of contrast-enhanced EUS (CE-EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) with EUS-FNA for lymph node (LN) staging in esophageal cancer. Methods: Thirty-seven subjects with esophageal cancer undergoing EUS staging were enrolled, and 30 completed this institutional review board-approved study. A Prosound F75 US system (Hitachi Medical Systems, Tokyo, Japan) with harmonic contrast imaging software and GF-UCT180 curvilinear endoscope (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) was utilized. All LNs identified by standard EUS were first noted. Sonazoid (dose: 1 mL; GE Healthcare, Oslo, Norway) was administered peritumorally, and all enhanced LNs were recorded. Fine-needle aspiration was performed on LNs considered suspicious by EUS alone, as well as LNs enhanced on CE-EUS. Performance of each modality was compared using FNA cytology as reference standard. Results: A total of 132 LNs were detected with EUS, of which 59 showed enhancement on CE-EUS. Fifty-three LNs underwent FNA, and 22 LNs were determined to be malignant. Among the latter, 10 were considered suspicious by EUS, whereas the other 12 LNs underwent FNA only because of CE-EUS enhancement. Contrast-enhanced EUS showed enhancement in 19 of the 22 malignant LNs. The rate of metastatic node identification from EUS was 45% (10/22), and it was 86% (19/22; Conclusions: Fine-needle aspiration of LNs identified by CE-EUS may increase metastasis positive rate by ruling out LNs not associated with the tumor drainage pattern. In addition, CE-EUS seems to identify more metastatic LNs that would not be biopsied under the standard EUS criteria.

Indexed as

Contrast-EUSEsophageal cancerEUSFine needle biopsySentinel lymph node

Identifiers

PMID37795347
PMCPMC10547247
OpenAlexW4387357338

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.