ArticleScientific reports2025
Usefulness of endoscopic ultrasonography for differentiating between non-functional pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm and intrapancreatic accessory spleen.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Splenoses and Other Ectopic and Heterotopic Splenic Tissue: The Use of Long-Lasting Enhancement in Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound to Avoid Unnecessary Intervention.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Clinical and imaging differentiation of intrapancreatic accessory spleen from pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor and solid-pseudopapillary tumor: a retrospective analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Case Report: A rare case of hemorrhagic cystic IPAS masquerading as pancreatic neoplasm.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In pancreatic hypervascular masses, it is often difficult to differentiate pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm (PanNEN) and intrapancreatic accessory spleen (IPAS) before surgery because of their similar features, such as a round shape and early enhancement. This study aimed to examine the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) for differentiating between them. This retrospective pilot study enrolled 136 patients with pathologically confirmed non-functional PanNEN or IPAS who underwent EUS at our institution. The clinical features, conventional EUS findings, EUS elastography (EUS-EG) findings, and contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (CH-EUS) findings were retrospectively evaluated. In conventional EUS, calcification had significant differences between PanNEN and IPAS (P = 0.006). On EUS-EG findings (stiff/soft), patients with PanNEN had softer lesions (6 (25%)/18 (75%)) and those with IPAS had stiffer lesions (3 (100%)/0 (0%)) (P = 0.029). CH-EUS revealed that 4/4 (100%) patients with IPAS had hyperechoic or isoechoic vascular patterns up to 300 s, while only 1/15 (7%) patient with PanNEN had such patterns at 300 s (P = 0.001), resulting in significant washout after 180 s in PanNEN group. This study is the first report on EUS to differentiate between PanNEN and IPAS. It is useful to evaluate calcification with conventional EUS, stiffness with EUS-EG, and enhancement patterns with CH-EUS for that.
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.