SynthesisBMC medical imaging2025
Comparative diagnostic performance of imaging modalities in chronic pancreatitis: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC medical imaging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- High-Dose Vitamin D and Early Chronic Pancreatitis-Related Changes After Acute Pancreatitis: A Randomized Dose Controlled Trial.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to perform a Bayesian network meta-analysis to assess the comparative diagnostic performance of different imaging modalities in chronic pancreatitis(CP).
methodsThe PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant publications until March 2024. All studies evaluating the head-to-head diagnostic performance of imaging modalities in CP were included. Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to compare the sensitivity and specificity between the imaging modalities. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Performance Studies (QUADAS-2) tool was used to evaluate the quality of studies.
resultsThis meta-analysis incorporated 17 studies. Network meta-analytic results indicated that endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) achieved the highest surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) value at 0.86 for sensitivity. Conversely, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) demonstrated best specificity, recording the highest SUCRA value at 0.99. Ultrasonography (US) displayed comparatively lower sensitivity than endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) (relative risk[RR]: 0.83, 95% Confidence Interval[CI]: 0.69-0.99) and EUS (RR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.57-0.91). MRI outperformed all other imaging modalities in terms of specificity.
conclusionsIt appears that EUS demonstrates higher sensitivity, while MRI exhibits higher specificity in patients with chronic pancreatitis. However, it is crucial to note that our analysis was limited to the diagnostic performance and did not evaluate the cost-effectiveness of these various imaging modalities. Consequently, further extensive studies are needed to assess the benefit-to-risk ratios comprehensively.
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.