The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Can EUS alone differentiate between malignant and benign cystic lesions of the pancreas?
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) alone to predict and differentiate malignant from benign cystic lesions of the pancreas. METHODS: From January, 1995, to August, 1999, 98 cases of pancreatic cystic lesions were evaluated by EUS; all of these were originally imaged by cross-sectional modalities that were not diagnostic. Among these, surgical/pathological correlation was available in 48 patients. The original endosonographic images were reviewed by two endosonographers who were blinded to each other's interpretation and to the surgical and pathological interpretation. The EUS images were assessed for the presence or absence of the following characteristics: 1) wall, 2) solid component, 3) septae, 4) lymphadenopathy, and 5) number of cysts. These characteristics were then correlated with the surgical and pathological findings and were assessed to determine if any were predictors of the lesion being benign or malignant. RESULTS: For reviewer A, the presence of a solid component by EUS was the only statistically significant predictor of malignancy (odds ratio = 4.73, 95% CI = 1.13-19.68, p = 0.03). However, 61% of patients with benign lesions were also interpreted by EUS to have a solid component. For reviewer B, none of the features were found to be significant predictors of a malignant lesion. When the results of both reviewers were combined, the presence of a solid component was not found to be a statistically significant predictor of malignancy (odds ratio = 1.046, 95% CI = 0.99-1.09, p = 0.07). CONCLUSION: Endosonographic features cannot reliably differentiate between benign and malignant cystic lesions of the pancreas after a nondiagnostic cross-sectional modality.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
European evidence-based guidelines on pancreatic cystic neoplasms
The European Study Group on Cystic Tumours of the Pancreas (2018) · Gut · doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2018-316027 · Cited by 1,417
Scheiman, J. M., Hwang, J. H., & Moayyedi, P. (2015) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2015.01.014 · Cited by 437
Ethanol lavage of pancreatic cystic lesions: initial pilot study
Gan, S. I., Thompson, C. C., Lauwers, G. Y., Bounds, B. C., & Brugge, W. R. (2005) · Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · doi:10.1016/s0016-5107(05)00320-2 · Cited by 301
Ahmad, N. A., Kochman, M. L., Brensinger, C., Brugge, W. R., Faigel, D. O., Gress, F. G., Kimmey, M. B., Nickl, N. J., Savides, T. J., Wallace, M. B., et al. (2003) · Gastrointestinal Endoscopy · doi:10.1067/mge.2003.298 · Cited by 279
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Ahmad, N.
- Venue
- The American Journal of Gastroenterology
- Published
- 2001-12
- Volume
- 96
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 3295-3300
- ISSN
- 0002-9270 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2008087406
- Cited by
- 205
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Can EUS alone differentiate between malignant and benign cystic lesions of the pancreas? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0002-9270(01)03890-4
- The paper
- Ahmad, N. (2001). Can EUS alone differentiate between malignant and benign cystic lesions of the pancreas? The American Journal of Gastroenterology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9270(01)03890-4
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.