ArticleRadiologia brasileira
Evaluation of the indications for performing magnetic resonance imaging of the female pelvis at a referral center for cancer, according to the American College of Radiology criteria.
Article in Radiologia brasileira. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Deep Learning-Based Prediction System for Surgical Difficulty in Rectal Cancer Patients Using MRI Pelvimetry.Yonsei medical journal · 2026Article
- Article
- Indications for magnetic resonance imaging of the female pelvis at a referral center for cancer.Radiologia brasileiraArticle
- Subpubic cartilaginous cyst: a rare cause of vulvar lesion.Radiologia brasileiraArticle
- Obstructive colorectal cancer presenting as constipation during pregnancy.Radiologia brasileiraArticle
- Transvaginal ultrasound in deep endometriosis: pictorial essay.Radiologia brasileiraArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the indications for performing magnetic resonance imaging of the female pelvis at a referral center for cancer. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis was a retrospective, single-center study, conducted by reviewing medical records and imaging reports. We included 1060 female patients who underwent magnetic resonance imaging of the pelvis at a cancer center between January 2013 and June 2014. The indications for performing the examination were classified according to the American College of Radiology (ACR) criteria.
resultsThe mean age of the patients was 52.6 ± 14.8 years, and 49.8% were perimenopausal or postmenopausal. The majority (63.9%) had a history of cancer, which was gynecologic in 29.5% and nongynecologic in 34.4%. Of the patients evaluated, 44.0% had clinical complaints, the most common being pelvic pain (in 11.5%) and bleeding (in 9.8%), and 34.7% of patients had previously had abnormal findings on ultrasound. Most (76.7%) of the patients met the criteria for undergoing magnetic resonance imaging, according to the ACR guidelines. The main indications were evaluation of tumor recurrence after surgical resection (in 25.9%); detection and staging of gynecologic neoplasms (in 23.3%); and evaluation of pelvic pain or of a mass (in 17.1%).
conclusionIn the majority of the cases evaluated, magnetic resonance imaging was clearly indicated according to the ACR criteria. The main indication was local recurrence after surgical treatment of pelvic malignancies, which is consistent with the routine protocols at cancer centers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.