MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400192899 · doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2024-bsg.226

P144 Role of the endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in diagnosing Focal Liver Lesions (FLL); Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

2024· article· en· W4400192899 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePoster presentations · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeta-analysisEndoscopic ultrasoundRadiologyMedicineUltrasoundSystematic reviewPathologyMEDLINEChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Introduction</h3> Recently, there has been a surge in the clinical utilization of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in hepatology.<sup>1</sup> These applications range from diagnosis to treatment of various liver diseases.<sup>2</sup> Therefore, the current systematic review has summarized the evidence on the diagnostic and therapeutic roles of EUS in liver diseases. <h3>Methods</h3> PubMed, Medline, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases were extensively scoured for studies until October 2023. The methodological quality of the eligible articles was performed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale or Cochrane’s Risk of Bias tool. In addition, statistical analyses were performed with the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. <h3>Results</h3> A total of 45 articles (28 evaluating the diagnostic role and 17 evaluating the therapeutic role of EUS) were included. The pooled analysis demonstrated that EUS diagnostic tests have an accuracy of 92.4% for focal liver lesions (FLL) and 96.6% for parenchymal liver diseases. In addition, the cumulative analyses showed that EUS-guided liver biopsies (EUS-LB) with either fine needle aspiration (FNA) or fine needle biopsy (FNB) have low complication rates when sampling FLL and parenchymal liver diseases (3.1% and 8.7%, respectively). Furthermore, analysis of data from four studies has shown that EUS-guided liver abscess (EUS-AD) has a high clinical (90.7%) and technical success (90.7%) without significant complications. Similarly, EUS-guided interventions for the treatment of gastric varices (GV) have a high technical success (98%) and GV obliteration rates (84%),with low complications (15%) and rebleeding events (17%). <h3>Conclusions</h3> EUS in liver diseases is a promising technique with the potential to be considered as a first-line therapeutic and diagnostic option in selected cases. <h3>References</h3> Gadour E, Hassan Z. Post-orthotopic liver transplant cholangiopathy assessment and surveillance with endoscopic ultrasonography: the way forward. <i>International Journal of Innovative Research in Medical Science</i> 2023;<b>8</b>(07):269–278. https://doi.org/10.23958/ijirms/vol08-i07/1717 Okasha HH, Delsa H, Alsawaf A, <i>et al.</i> Role of endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue acquisition in diagnosing hepatic focal lesions. <i>World J Methodol</i>. 2023;<b>13</b>(4):287–295. doi:10.5662/w jm.v13.i4.287

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.763
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it