ArticleMedicine2018
The clinical application value of MR diffusion-weighted imaging in the diagnosis of rectal cancer: A retrospective study.
Article in Medicine, 2018. 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.
- Multi-parametric MRI radiomics for predicting response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer.Japanese journal of radiology · 2024Article
- The Clinical Value of the Combined Detection of Enhanced CT, MRI, CEA, and CA199 in the Diagnosis of Rectal Cancer.Journal of oncology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study evaluated the clinical potential of magnetic resonance (MR) diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in the diagnosis of rectal cancer.A total of 84 patients confirmed with rectal cancer were used as study subjects in the present study. All patients received conventional sequence MR T1WI, T2WI, and DWI examination as well as operative pathological examination. The differences between the MRI results and operative pathological results were analyzed.The diagnosis accordance rates of conventional sequence examination in stage T1, T2, T3, and T4 were 60.00%, 82.75%, 62.85%, and 80.00%, respectively. The diagnosis accordance rates of conventional sequence combined with DWI examination in stages T1, T2, T3, and T4 were 100.00%, 100.00%, 82.85%, and 100.00% respectively. The total diagnosis accordance rates in the T staging of rectal cancer with conventional (Routinely or generally applied) sequence examination and conventional sequence combined with DWI examination were 71.42% and 92.85%, respectively.The analysis on consistency of MR conventional sequence examination suggested that the conventional sequence combined with DWI examination is more consistent with pathological staging when compared with the convention sequence examination alone. MR DWI combined with conventional sequences reveals quite good accuracy in the T staging of rectal cancer.
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.