ArticleSurgical neurology international2017
Ependymal enhancement on magnetic resonance imaging for the identification of high-grade gliomas.
Article in Surgical neurology international, 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.
- Article
- Radiomics-based neural network predicts recurrence patterns in glioblastoma using dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MRI.Scientific reports · 2021Article
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
backgroundHigh-grade gliomas have high infiltrative potential and spread along white matter and blood vessels. Enhancement of ependymal lining on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is considered as a marker of parenchymal spread of disease. In this study, we aimed to assess the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of ependymal enhancement (EE) for identification of high-grade glial tumors.
methodsWe reviewed preoperative MRI scans of 94 consecutive patients surgically treated for space occupying lesions of the brain for EE. Assessment for EE was blind to the final histopathological diagnosis of the patient. An enhancement of more than 2 mm was considered positive. Pathologies of these patients were reviewed and matched to the radiological findings. Percentage and proportion of EE in glial and non-glial pathology groups was then calculated and a sensitivity and specificity analysis was performed.
resultsThe population included 94 cases (64 males and 30 females) with population mean age 45 ± 15.5 years. Sensitivity of EE in differentiating glioma from total number of cases was 82.61% specificity 35.42% (
conclusionEE has moderate sensitivity and specificity for high-grade gliomas. However, larger sample studies are required for further validation of this observations.
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.