Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27239115›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2016

Rectal cancer staging: Multidetector-row computed tomography diagnostic accuracy in assessment of mesorectal fascia invasion.

Davide Ippolito, Silvia Girolama Drago, Cammillo Talei Franzesi, Davide Fior, Sandro Sironi

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Davide IppolitoDavide Ippolito, Silvia Girolama Drago, Cammillo Talei Franzesi, Davide Fior, Sandro Sironi, School of Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, 20900 Monza (MB), Italy.
Silvia Girolama DragoDavide Ippolito, Silvia Girolama Drago, Cammillo Talei Franzesi, Davide Fior, Sandro Sironi, School of Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, 20900 Monza (MB), Italy.
Cammillo Talei FranzesiDavide Ippolito, Silvia Girolama Drago, Cammillo Talei Franzesi, Davide Fior, Sandro Sironi, School of Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, 20900 Monza (MB), Italy.
Davide FiorDavide Ippolito, Silvia Girolama Drago, Cammillo Talei Franzesi, Davide Fior, Sandro Sironi, School of Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, 20900 Monza (MB), Italy.
Sandro SironiDavide Ippolito, Silvia Girolama Drago, Cammillo Talei Franzesi, Davide Fior, Sandro Sironi, School of Medicine, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, 20900 Monza (MB), Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo assess the diagnostic accuracy of multidetector-row computed tomography (MDCT) as compared with conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), in identifying mesorectal fascia (MRF) invasion in rectal cancer patients.

methodsNinety-one patients with biopsy proven rectal adenocarcinoma referred for thoracic and abdominal CT staging were enrolled in this study. The contrast-enhanced MDCT scans were performed on a 256 row scanner (ICT, Philips) with the following acquisition parameters: tube voltage 120 KV, tube current 150-300 mAs. Imaging data were reviewed as axial and as multiplanar reconstructions (MPRs) images along the rectal tumor axis. MRI study, performed on 1.5 T with dedicated phased array multicoil, included multiplanar T2 and axial T1 sequences and diffusion weighted images (DWI). Axial and MPR CT images independently were compared to MRI and MRF involvement was determined. Diagnostic accuracy of both modalities was compared and statistically analyzed.

resultsAccording to MRI, the MRF was involved in 51 patients and not involved in 40 patients. DWI allowed to recognize the tumor as a focal mass with high signal intensity on high b-value images, compared with the signal of the normal adjacent rectal wall or with the lower tissue signal intensity background. The number of patients correctly staged by the native axial CT images was 71 out of 91 (41 with involved MRF; 30 with not involved MRF), while by using the MPR 80 patients were correctly staged (45 with involved MRF; 35 with not involved MRF). Local tumor staging suggested by MDCT agreed with those of MRI, obtaining for CT axial images sensitivity and specificity of 80.4% and 75%, positive predictive value (PPV) 80.4%, negative predictive value (NPV) 75% and accuracy 78%; while performing MPR the sensitivity and specificity increased to 88% and 87.5%, PPV was 90%, NPV 85.36% and accuracy 88%. MPR images showed higher diagnostic accuracy, in terms of MRF involvement, than native axial images, as compared to the reference magnetic resonance images. The difference in accuracy was statistically significant (P = 0.02).

conclusionNew generation CT scanner, using high resolution MPR images, represents a reliable diagnostic tool in assessment of loco-regional and whole body staging of advanced rectal cancer, especially in patients with MRI contraindications.

Indexed as

Multidetector Computed TomographyAdenocarcinomaAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiopsyEquipment DesignFasciaFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm InvasivenessNeoplasm StagingPredictive Value of TestsMagnetic resonanceMesorectal fasciaMulti detector computed tomographyMultiplanar reconstructionsRectal cancer

Identifiers

PMID27239115
PMCPMC4873881

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.