ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2018
Is magnetic resonance imaging useful for the management of patients with rectal villous adenoma? A study of 45 consecutive patients treated by transanal endoscopic microsurgery.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2018. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of diffusion kurtosis imaging in differentiating T0-T1 from T2 rectal tumors.Cancer imaging : the official publication of the International Cancer Imaging Society · 2025Article
- How to Study the Location and Size of Rectal Tumors That Are Candidates for Local Surgery: Rigid Rectoscopy, Magnetic Resonance, Endorectal Ultrasound or Colonoscopy? An Interobservational Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Magnifying chromoendoscopy is a reliable method in the selection of rectal neoplasms for local excision.Techniques in coloproctology · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeVery few data are available about the clinical relevance of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in preoperative evaluation of rectal villous adenoma. The aim is to evaluate the impact of MR imaging for the surgical management of rectal villous adenoma treated by transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM).
methodsAll patients with histologically proven rectal villous tumours operated by TEM who had a preoperative MR imaging between 2009 and 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. All patients underwent TEM because preoperative evaluation suggested systematically usT0 or usT1 tumour. Pathological stage was blindly compared to preoperative MR imaging (location according to the anal verge and the peritoneal reflection, amount of circumferential involvement, tumour size and staging) and preoperative transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) results.
resultsForty-five patients were included (24 men, mean age 65 ± 8 years) with TRUS data available only in 37. Pathologic results were pT0-pTis in 32, pT1 in 10 and pT2 in 3. TRUS diagnosed correctly 36/37 lesions (97%) and understaged one pT2 tumour. A significant correlation between TRUS and pathologic results was noted (r = 0.99; p = 0.01). MR imaging diagnosed correctly 19/42 pTis-T1 and 1/3 pT2 tumours (46%). Overstaging by MR imaging was noted in 25 cases (54%). No correlation between MR imaging and pathologic results was noted (r = 0.7; p = 0.3).
conclusionPreoperative evaluation of rectal villous adenoma is overstaged by MRI in more than half of the patients. This study suggests that the indication of local excision by TEM for rectal villous adenoma should be based on TRUS rather than on MRI.
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.