A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Enhancing the Diagnostic Performance of Repeated Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition Combined with Surrogate Repeated Endoscopic Retrograde Pancreatography for Small Pancreatic Cancer. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Purpose: Diagnosing pancreatic tumors ≤ 10 mm is challenging due to limited visualization and low sampling sensitivity. This study aimed to evaluate the cumulative diagnostic performance of repeated endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition (EUS-TA) and surrogate repeated endoscopic retrograde pancreatography (ERP).

Methods: This study analyzed 40 patients with suspected pancreatic tumors ≤ 10 mm who underwent EUS-TA and/or ERP retrospectively. When a diagnosis could not be determined based on the initial EUS-TA or ERP procedure, EUS-TA or ERP was repeated as necessary. The cumulative diagnostic performance of EUS-TA and ERP for pancreatic tumors was evaluated.

Results: EUS-TA was performed once for 35 cases, twice for seven cases, and three times for one case. ERP was performed for 15 cases, and the median number of ERP attempts was two (range, 1-8). The cumulative sensitivity of EUS-TA increased from 56.7% to 70.0% after three attempts, while ERP sensitivity increased from 54.5% to 72.7% after two attempts. The cumulative diagnostic performance of repeated EUS-TA and ERP combined by case included sensitivity and accuracy rates of 87.9% and 90.0%. When limited to pancreatic cancer, the sensitivity and accuracy rates were 95.8% and 96.8%, respectively. No severe adverse events occurred.

Conclusion: Repeated EUS-TA and ERP showed good diagnostic sensitivity for small pancreatic cancers ≤ 10 mm. When malignancy is suspected but not confirmed by a single procedure, repeating both may be an option in selected cases. Performing EUS-TA and ERP at least twice may be reasonable when small pancreatic cancer is suspected.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10620-025-09373-5DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

eus-ta erp
24
diagnostic performance
16
repeated endoscopic
16
performance repeated
12
small pancreatic
12
pancreatic cancer
12
cumulative diagnostic
12
eus-ta
10
erp
10
endoscopic ultrasound-guided
8

Similar Publications