ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025
Clinical, Radiological, and Endoscopic Features of Pancreatic Pseudocyst and Walled-Off Necrosis: How to Diagnose and How to Drain Them.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Walled-Off Pancreatic Necrosis Mimicking a Pancreatic Pseudocyst: A Diagnostic Pitfall With Therapeutic Implications.Cureus · 2026Article
- Pancreatic cystic lesions: position paper of the SIRM-AISP multidisciplinary group.La Radiologia medica · 2026Article
- From Drainage to Strategy: A Call for Standardization in Necrotizing Pancreatitis.United European gastroenterology journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pancreatic pseudocysts (PPs) and walled-off necrosis (WON) are two distinct sequelae of acute and chronic pancreatitis, requiring accurate differentiation to guide appropriate management. Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) remain essential for distinguishing PPs from WON, assessing their content, and identifying potential complications. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has emerged as a key modality for both diagnosis and drainage planning, offering high-resolution imaging and the possibility of real-time aspiration. Management strategies have evolved significantly, shifting from surgical to minimally invasive approaches. Endoscopic drainage, including EUS-guided transmural drainage with double-pigtail or lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), has become the preferred strategy for symptomatic or infected collections. Endoscopic necrosectomy is increasingly performed for WON, providing a less invasive alternative to surgical debridement. However, patient selection and procedural techniques remain topics of ongoing debate. The aim of this review is to provide a comprehensive synthesis of current evidence regarding the diagnosis and management of pancreatic pseudocyst and walled-off necrosis. We will synthesize current evidence on diagnostic criteria, imaging modalities, and therapeutic algorithms for PPs and WON. We will discuss technical aspects, success rates, and complications associated with drainage modalities, comparing endoscopic, percutaneous, and surgical approaches. Special attention will be given to recent advancements in interventional endoscopy and their impact on patient outcomes. By integrating clinical insights with the latest literature, this review aims to provide an up-to-date reference for clinicians managing pancreatic fluid collections. A literature search was performed using PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and MEDLINE databases to identify relevant studies on diagnostic criteria, imaging techniques, and management strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.