ArticlePediatric radiology2016
Accuracy of pre-contrast imaging in abdominal magnetic resonance imaging of pediatric oncology patients.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2016. 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.
- Use and Safety of Gadolinium Based Contrast Agents in Pediatric MR Imaging.Indian journal of pediatrics · 2019Review
- Evaluation of suspected musculoskeletal infection in children over 2 years of age using only fluid-sensitive sequences at MRI.European radiology · 2019Article
- Detection of pediatric musculoskeletal pathology using the fluid-sensitive sequence.Pediatric radiology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSafety concerns are increasingly raised regarding the use of gadolinium-based contrast media for MR imaging.
objectiveTo determine the accuracy of pre-contrast abdominal MR imaging for lesion detection and characterization in pediatric oncology patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe included 120 children (37 boys and 83 girls; mean age 8.94 years) referred by oncology services. Twenty-five had MRI for the first time and 95 were follow-up scans. Two authors independently reviewed pre-contrast MR images to note the following information about the lesions: location, number, solid vs. cystic and likely nature. Pre- and post-contrast imaging reviewed together served as the reference standard.
resultsThe overall sensitivity was 88% for the first reader and 90% for the second; specificity was 94% and 91%; positive predictive value was 96% and 94%; negative predictive value was 82% and 84%; accuracy of pre-contrast imaging for lesion detection as compared to the reference standard was 90% for both readers. The difference between mean number of lesions detected on pre-contrast imaging and reference standard was not significant for either reader (reader 1, P = 0.072; reader 2, P = 0.071). There was substantial agreement (kappa values of 0.76 and 0.72 for readers 1 and 2) between pre-contrast imaging and reference standard for determining solid vs. cystic lesion and likely nature of the lesion. The addition of post-contrast imaging increased confidence of both readers significantly (P < 0.0001), but the interobserver agreement for the change in confidence was poor (kappa 0.12).
conclusionPre-contrast abdominal MR imaging has high accuracy in lesion detection in pediatric oncology patients and shows substantial agreement with the reference standard for characterization of lesions. Gadolinium-based contrast media administration cannot be completely eliminated but can be avoided in many cases, with the decision made on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration location and type of tumor.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27406610What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.