SynthesisEuropean radiology2018
Chemical shift magnetic resonance imaging for distinguishing minimal-fat renal angiomyolipoma from renal cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in European radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- A nomogram model for challenging cases: differentiating fat-poor angiomyolipoma from clear cell renal cell carcinoma in uncertain or misdiagnosed tumors.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging characteristics of renal cell carcinoma: Differences between subtypes and clinical evaluation.Journal of clinical imaging science · 2025Review
- Multi-sequence MRI-based radiomics model to preoperatively predict the WHO/ISUP grade of clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: a two-center study.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Review
- Differentiating renal cell carcinoma and oncocytoma with volumetric MRI histogram analysis.Northern clinics of Istanbul · 2023Article
- MRI-Based Radiomics and Urine Creatinine for the Differentiation of Renal Angiomyolipoma With Minimal Fat From Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Preliminary Study.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Renal Epithelioid Angiomyolipoma in Children.Journal of kidney cancer and VHL · 2021Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging features of minimal-fat angiomyolipoma and causes of preoperative misdiagnosis.World journal of clinical cases · 2020Article
- A CT-based radiomics nomogram for differentiation of renal angiomyolipoma without visible fat from homogeneous clear cell renal cell carcinoma.European radiology · 2020Article
- Renal and adrenal masses containing fat at MRI: Proposed nomenclature by the society of abdominal radiology disease-focused panel on renal cell carcinoma.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2019Article
- CT features of hepatic epithelioid angiomyolipoma: differentiation from hepatocellular carcinoma in patients with noncirrhotic livers.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine the performance of chemical shift signal intensity index (CS-SII) values for distinguishing minimal-fat renal angiomyolipoma (mfAML) from renal cell carcinoma (RCC) and to assess RCC subtype characterisation.
methodsWe identified eligible studies on CS magnetic resonance imaging (CS-MRI) of focal renal lesions via PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. CS-SII values were extracted by lesion type and evaluated using linear mixed model-based meta-regression. RCC subtypes were analysed. Two-sided p value <0.05 indicated statistical significance. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool.
resultsEleven articles involving 850 patients were included. Minimal-fat AML had significantly higher CS-SII value than RCC (p < 0.05); there were no significant differences between mfAML and clear cell RCC (cc-RCC) (p = 0.112). Clear cell RCC had a significantly higher CS-SII value than papillary RCC (p-RCC) (p < 0.001) and chromophobe RCC (ch-RCC) (p = 0.045). The methodological quality was relatively high, and Begg's test data points indicated no obvious publication bias.
conclusionsThe CS-SII value for differentiating mfAML from cc-RCC remains unproven, but is a promising method for differentiating cc-RCC from p-RCC and ch-RCC. KEY POINTS: • RCC CS-SII values are significantly lower than those of mfAML overall. • CS-SII values cannot aid differentiation between mfAML and cc-RCC. • CS-SII values might help characterise RCC subtypes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29178029What 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.