Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38014445›Full record

ReviewDigestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society2024

Endoscopic evaluation of indeterminate biliary strictures: Cholangioscopy, endoscopic ultrasound, or both?

Raymond S Y Tang

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. New Horizons in Cholangiopancreatoscopy: Where Are We Heading in 2026?Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2026
    Article
  2. Advances in Diagnosis and Treatment With Cholangiopancreatoscopy.Digestive endoscopy : official journal of the Japan Gastroenterological Endoscopy Society · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Raymond S Y TangDepartment of Medicine and Therapeutics, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2433-8036
Chinese University of Hong Kong · HK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate and timely diagnosis of biliary strictures can be challenging. Because the diagnostic sensitivity and accuracy of standard endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-based tissue sampling for malignancy are suboptimal, additional endoscopic evaluation by cholangioscopy and/or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is often necessary to differentiate between malignant and benign biliary strictures to guide clinical management. While direct visualization by cholangioscopy and/or high-resolution imaging by EUS are often the first step in the evaluation of an indeterminate biliary stricture (IDBS), tissue diagnosis by cholangioscopy-guided biopsy and/or EUS-guided fine-needle tissue acquisition is the preferred modality to establish a diagnosis of malignancy. Because each modality has its own strengths and limitations, selection of cholangioscopy and EUS is best guided by the biliary stricture location and local expertise. Artificial intelligence-assisted diagnosis, biopsy forceps with improved design, contrast-enhanced EUS, and dedicated fine-needle biopsy devices are recent technological advances that may further improve the diagnostic performance of cholangioscopy and EUS in patients with IDBS.

Indexed as

CholestasisEndoscopy, Digestive SystemEndosonographyCholangiopancreatography, Endoscopic RetrogradeConstriction, PathologicFemaleHumansMalecholangioscopyendoscopic ultrasoundindeterminate biliary stricture

Identifiers

PMID38014445
PMCPMC12136245
OpenAlexW4389091968

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.