ArticlePediatric radiology2017
Identifying intestinal malrotation on magnetic resonance examinations ordered for unrelated indications.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Ultrasound for malrotation and volvulus - point.Pediatric radiology · 2022Review
- CT facilitates improved diagnosis of adult intestinal malrotation: a 7-year retrospective study based on 332 cases.Insights into imaging · 2021Article
- MRI of the bowel - beyond inflammatory bowel disease.Pediatric radiology · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnatomical imaging findings indicating normal bowel rotation can be identified on cross-sectional imaging, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) performed for non-related indications.
objectiveThe goal of our study was to assess whether non-targeted MRI can accurately assess intestinal malrotation. MATERIALS AND
methodsFour anatomical landmarks were assessed on MRIs of the chest, spine or abdomen performed from January 2006 to June 2014, on patients who also had upper gastrointestinal series (UGI) performed within 10 years of the MRI date: 1) retroperitoneal duodenum, 2) left upper quadrant duodenojejunal junction, 3) superior mesenteric artery to the left of the superior mesenteric vein, and 4) right lower quadrant cecum. Two attending radiologists, one pediatric and one abdominal radiologist, independently reviewed the MR images. The pediatric radiologist reviewed images from UGI (considered the gold standard) to determine the intestinal rotation for each case. Validation of the criteria was performed on new patients imaged through January 2016.
resultsThe original cohort included 109 MRIs (15 chest, 41 spine and 53 abdomen) done on 109 patients (42% males, mean age: 10.2 years). If each of the 4 anatomical questions were answered "yes" (4-YES), specificity was 100% for each radiologist and malrotation was appropriately excluded. Using the 4-YES criteria, the pediatric radiologist excluded malrotation in 71 patients (65%) and the abdominal radiologist excluded it in 65 (60%), with concurrence for 57 patients. Validation of the 4-YES criteria in 23 new patients appropriately proved the 4-YES rule, with neither labeling the one new malrotation case 4-YES.
conclusionIf a radiologist can confidently answer "yes" to the four questions evaluated in this study, then intestinal rotation can be safely considered normal. Normal bowel rotation should be commented upon in MRI reports when these four anatomical locations are imaged, thus helping patients avoid unnecessary UGI and radiation exposure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28623416What 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.