Endoscopic Ultrasound Elastography

Giovannini, Marc

doi:10.1159/000323496

Cited by 33 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[25][26][27][28][29][30] The advent of second-generation elastography software allowing quantification of tissue elasticity has provided endosonographers with a potentially more objective tool in the differential diagnosis of pancreatic masses. However, although 2 recent studies 17,18 reported high specificity for SR analysis in this setting, we were unable to replicate these findings in a larger independent cohort. In contrast, our results accord with those of other studies 16,20 reporting a specificity for SR analysis of 42% and 76%, respectively.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 79%

Diagnostic accuracy of quantitative EUS elastography for discriminating malignant from benign solid pancreatic masses: a prospective, single-center study

Dawwas

Taha

Leeds

et al. 2012

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 79%

Diagnostic accuracy of quantitative EUS elastography for discriminating malignant from benign solid pancreatic masses: a prospective, single-center study

Dawwas

Taha

Leeds

et al. 2012

Gastrointestinal Endoscopy

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In the elastographic images, different elasticity values are coded with different colors, where blue indicates hard tissues, red indicates soft tissues, and yellow or green indicates intermediate tissues [36]. In the color pattern diagnosis, the evaluation is made on the basis of major color tones and its distribution [36][37][38]. Giovannini et al [29] developed an elastic score to assign the elastographic images.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic utility of endoscopic ultrasonography-elastography in the evaluation of solid pancreatic masses: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Lü

Chen

et al. 2017

Med Ultrason

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: The accuracy for endoscopic ultrasonography-elastography (EUS-EG) in the evaluation of solid pancreatic masses varies greatly and the pooled results have not been updated since 2013. Also, there still lack a comprehensive comparison among EUS-EG, contrast-enhanced EUS (CE-EUS), and EUS-guided fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA).Material and methods: A thorough search was made for diagnostic trials investigating the role of EUS-EG in solid pancreatic masses. Meta-Disc was used to calculate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio and summary receiver operator characteristics. Results: Finally, 17 studies (1537 patients, 1544 lesions) were selected. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for qualitative methods were 0.97 (95%CI, 0.95-0.99) and 0.67 (95%CI, 0.59-0.74), respectively; the pooled sensitivity and specificity for strain histograms were 0.97 (95%CI, 0.95-0.98) and 0.67(95%CI, 0.61-0.73), respectively; the pooled sensitivity and specificity for strain ratio were 0.98 (95%CI, 0.96-0.99) and 0.62 (95%CI, 0.56-0.68), respectively; the pooled sensitivity and specificity for CE-EUS were 0.90 (95%CI, 0.83-0.95) and 0.76 (95%CI, 0.67-0.84), respectively; the pooled sensitivity and specificity for EUS-FNA were 0.84 (95%CI, 0.77-0.90) and 0.96(95%CI, 0.88-1.00), respectively. Conclusion: EUS-EG is reliable for distinguishing solid pancreatic masses; the sensitivity and specificity for different diagnostic methods were very close. Both EUS-EG and CE-EUS can be valuable complementary supplements for EUS-FNA.

show abstract

“…Another unique approach is EUS elastography, which may help to accurately discriminate between malignant and benign nodules [17] . Presently, however, the specificity of this approach is unsatisfactory, and further improvements in equipments and techniques are anticipated.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%