Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38411693›Full record

ReviewAbdominal radiology (New York)2024

Management of incidentally detected gallbladder polyps: a review of clinical scenarios using the 2022 SRU gallbladder polyp consensus guidelines.

Jessica Knight, Aya Kamaya, David Fetzer, Nirvikar Dahiya, Helena Gabriel, Shuchi K Rodgers, Mitchell Tublin, Andrew Walsh, David Bingham, William Middleton and 1 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

11 authors at 8 institutions in 2 countries.

Jessica KnightDepartment of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Walter C. Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre, University of Alberta, 8440-112 Street, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2B7, Canada. jknight@ualberta.ca.ORCID 0000-0003-2508-6130
Aya KamayaDepartment of Radiology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford Hospital and Clinics, 300 Pasteur Dr, H1307, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA.
David FetzerDepartment of Radiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, 75390, USA.
Nirvikar DahiyaDepartment of Radiology, Mayo Clinic Scottsdale, Phoenix, AZ, 85259, USA.
Helena GabrielDepartment of Radiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA.
Shuchi K RodgersDepartment of Radiology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA.
Mitchell TublinDepartment of Radiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA.
Andrew WalshDepartment of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Walter C. Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre, University of Alberta, 8440-112 Street, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2B7, Canada.
David BinghamDepartment of Pathology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford Hospital and Clinics, 300 Pasteur Dr, H1307, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA.
William MiddletonMallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, 63110, USA.
Christopher FungDepartment of Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, Walter C. Mackenzie Health Sciences Centre, University of Alberta, 8440-112 Street, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2B7, Canada.
University of Alberta · CAStanford Health Care · USMallinckrodt (United States) · USMayo Clinic in Arizona · USNorthwestern University · USThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · USThomas Jefferson University · USUniversity of Pittsburgh · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gallbladder (GB) polyps are a common incidental finding on sonography, but only a small fraction of polyps become GB cancer. The Society of Radiologists in Ultrasound (SRU) consensus committee recently performed an extensive literature review and published guidelines for GB polyp follow-up/management to provide clarity among the many heterogeneous recommendations that are available to clinicians. As these guidelines have become adopted into clinical practice, challenging clinical scenarios have arisen including GB polyps in primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC), high risk geographic/genetic patient populations, shrinking polyps, pedunculated vs sessile polyps, thin vs thick stalked polyps, vascular polyps and multiple polyps. According to the SRU guidelines, clinicians should refer to gastroenterology guidelines when managing GB polyps in patients with known PSC. If patients at high geographic/genetic risk develop GB polyps, 'extremely low risk' polyps may be managed as 'low risk' and 10-14 mm 'extremely low risk' or '7-14 mm' low risk polyps that decrease in size by ≥ 4 mm require no follow-up. Thin-stalked or pedunculated polyps are 'extremely low risk' and thick-stalked pedunculated polyps are 'low risk'. Sessile polyps are 'low risk' but should receive immediate specialist referral if features suggestive of GB cancer are present. Neither polyp multiplicity nor vascularity impact risk of GB cancer and follow up should be based on morphology alone.

Indexed as

Gallbladder DiseasesIncidental FindingsPolypsConsensusGallbladder NeoplasmsHumansPractice Guidelines as TopicUltrasonographyFollow-upGallbladderGuidelinesManagementPolypUltrasound

Identifiers

PMID38411693
OpenAlexW4392191893

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.