SynthesisIn vivo (Athens, Greece)
Contrast-enhanced Sonography for Detecting Endoleaks After Popliteal Artery Aneurysm Repair: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in In vivo (Athens, Greece). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimThe role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in follow-up after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm is well established. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the role of CEUS after open and endovascular repair of popliteal artery aneurysm (PAA). PATIENTS AND
methodsA systematic literature review was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.Gov, and ICTRP databases up to 2024, focusing on CEUS-based follow-up examination. The primary endpoint focused on the comparative diagnostic accuracy of CEUS for endoleaks detection after PAA repair.
resultsTwo studies on endoleak detection after PAA repair using CEUS were identified. Both lacked a systematic comparison of CEUS with a reference standard such as computed tomography angiography. While the overall risk of bias in patient selection and CEUS-(index) testing was considered low, the accuracy of CEUS was only assessed to a very limited extent using the established QUADAS-2 tool for diagnostic studies. In one of the two studies, CEUS was highly sensitive in detecting endoleaks, which were also detectable in PAA sac shrinkage.
conclusionThe role of CEUS in the detection of endoleaks after PAA repair is currently unclear. It can be hypothesized that CEUS-based endoleak detection is very sensitive but may not be predictive of PAA growth after repair. Future studies with improved methodological quality are necessary to define the diagnostic accuracy of CEUS-based endoleak detection and its clinical significance.
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.