ArticleHead & neck2026
Multiparametric Ultrasound for Preoperative Assessment of Parotid Tumors: A Novel Diagnostic Pathway.
Article in Head & neck, 2026. 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.
- The role of ultrasound texture analysis in the discrimination of pleomorphic adenoma and Warthin tumor in subjects with well-defined tumor borders.Gland surgery · 2026Article
- Multiparametric Ultrasound for Preoperative Assessment of Parotid Tumors: A Novel Diagnostic Pathway.Head & neck · 2026Article
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
backgroundAccurate preoperative differentiation of parotid gland tumors (PGTs) is essential for facial nerve preservation. This study evaluates a novel, real-time multiparametric ultrasound (mpUS) approach combining B-mode, shear wave elastography (SWE), and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), based on qualitative image interpretation.
methodsEighty-nine patients with 91 PGTs underwent mpUS prior to surgery or ultrasound-guided biopsy. Two blinded experts independently reviewed the images and reached consensus through real-time discussion. Only qualitative features were assessed. Histopathology served as the reference.
resultsmpUS achieved 83% sensitivity (95% CI: 62.6-94.0), 94% specificity (95% CI: 84.3-98.1), and 91% accuracy (95% CI: 82.4-96.3). CEUS and SWE provided complementary perfusion and stiffness data. CCDS was excluded due to limited value.
conclusionmpUS improves diagnostic accuracy compared to single-modality US and supports early, targeted treatment. Limitations include the small number of malignancies, single-center design, and qualitative evaluation. Broader use may require training and equipment access.
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.