ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024
Application of Indian ink markers for locating gastric varices under endoscopic ultrasonography.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cyanoacrylate injection assisted by endosonographic mini-probe in the management of gastric varices: a single-center, retrospective cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2025Article
- EUS-Guided Vascular Interventions: Recent Advances.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe present study aimed to investigate the accuracy of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) combined with Indian ink in locating target vessels of gastric varices (GVs) compared with conventional endoscopic techniques. Additionally, the characteristics of GVs under conventional endoscopy were also explored.
methodsAll 50 cirrhotic patients with GVs between August 2021 and December 2022 were included in the study. Firstly, conventional endoscopy was employed to identify GVs and to record the expected injection sites. Subsequently, EUS was used to locate the perforated vessel and the injection site was them marked with India ink followed by injection with cyanoacrylate (CYA). Finally, conventional endoscopy was used to examine GVs, to identify the marker points of Indian ink and to compare whether the injection points under conventional endoscopy were consistent with those marked with Indian ink. Furthermore, patients with consistent and inconsistent distribution of endoscopic markers and injection sites were divided into two groups.
resultsEUS could detect the perforating vessels in real time and intuitively. The distribution of markers using EUS was significantly different compared with the injection points obtained by conventional endoscopy (P < 0.001). Therefore, 20 cases were allocated to the consistent group and 30 cases to the non-consistent group. 16 patients who showed red wale signs were obtained in the consistent group and 11 patients in the non-consistent group (P = 0.048). The diameter of the largest GVs was 13.5 (10-15) mm in the consistent group compared with 10 (7.5-10) mm in the non-consistent group (P = 0.006).
conclusionEUS could provide the exact location of GVs, thus more accurately describing the endoscopic characteristics of the GVs. Furthermore, the red wale signs and diameter of the largest GVs obtained using conventional endoscopy were helpful in determining the location of target GVs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38012437What 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.