Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29038992›Full record

ReviewDer Radiologe2017

[Soft tissue sarcoma: how can posttreatment alterations be distinguished from recurrences?]

I-M Noebauer-Huhmann, T Grieser

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Radiologe, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

I-M Noebauer-HuhmannAbteilung für Neuroradiologie und Muskuloskeletale Radiologie, Universitätsklinik für Radiologie und Nuklearmedizin, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1090, Wien, Österreich. iris.noebauer@meduniwien.ac.at.
T GrieserKlinik für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie und Neuroradiologie, Klinikum Augsburg, Augsburg, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The recognition of recurrent soft tissue sarcomas and the differentiation from post-treatment alterations is complex. This article aims to assist the clinical radiologist in the systematic evaluation of local follow-up imaging in soft tissue sarcoma patients. Soft tissue sarcomas encompass multiple entities with different recurrence rates and follow-up intervals. Approved and up to date recommendations are provided, including imaging techniques. The past medical history of the patient, the clinical situation and previous therapies should be known in detail, including surgery, radiation therapy and chemotherapy. Previous imaging results should be consulted, if available. This article describes the time-dependent imaging spectrum of local post-therapeutic as well as local treatment-related complications. These include early complications, such as seromas, hematomas and infections, as well as late complications, including edema, fibrosis and joint stiffness, and also inflammatory pseudotumors, which may occur after variable time intervals. The imaging appearance of local recurrent and radiation-associated sarcoma are elucidated. In particular, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) criteria are provided, which may help in differentiating post-therapeutic alterations from recurrent soft tissue sarcomas.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingDiagnosis, DifferentialHumansNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographySarcomaSoft Tissue NeoplasmsTomography, X-Ray ComputedEdemaGuidelinesHematomaRadiosurgerySeroma

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.