ArticleSkeletal radiology2017
Magnetic resonance imaging appearance of soft-tissue metastases: our experience at an orthopedic oncology center.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ultrasound and CT findings of subcutaneous metastases in trunk and pelvis: a comprehensive analysis.Skeletal radiology · 2024Article
- Synchronous lung and multiple soft tissue metastases developed from osteosarcoma of tibia: a rare case report and genetic profile analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
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
objectiveTo assess the prevalence and magnetic resonance imaging appearance of metastasis presenting as a soft-tissue mass. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective chart review was performed on 51 patients who presented to an orthopedic oncology center with soft-tissue masses, with a histology-proven diagnosis of soft-tissue metastasis, over a 14-year period. Their magnetic resonance imaging, primary origin, and follow-up have been assessed.
resultsSoft-tissue metastasis was identified in patients ranging from 18 to 85 years old. Most (80%) of the masses were located deep to the deep fascia. In our cohort of patients, melanoma was the most common primary malignancy contributing to soft-tissue metastasis (21.8%). Among soft-tissue metastasis from solid organs, breast and lung were the most frequent (9.1% each). Five patients had soft-tissue metastases from an unknown primary.
conclusionImaging diagnosis of soft-tissue metastases is challenging as it can demonstrate imaging appearances similar to primary soft-tissue sarcoma. The presence of a known malignancy may not be evident in everyone, and even if available, histopathology will be necessary for diagnosis if this is the only site of recurrence/metastasis to differentiate from a primary soft-tissue sarcoma. Moreover, soft-tissue metastasis may be the initial presentation of a malignancy. Primary malignancies with soft-tissue metastasis carry a poor prognosis; hence, prompt diagnosis and management in essential.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28180954What 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.