ArticleTechnology in cancer research & treatment2019
Comparison Between Size and Stage of Preoperative Tumor Defined by Preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Postoperative Specimens After Radical Resection of Esophageal Cancer.
Article in Technology in cancer research & treatment, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical value of predicting bleeding after endoscopic submucosal dissection for early esophageal cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Article
- Clinical value of multiparameters of 2-[ 18 F]-fluoro-2-deoxy-glucose PET/MRI in tumor/lymph node staging of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.Nuclear medicine communications · 2025Article
- Advancing Esophageal Cancer Staging and Restaging: The Role of MRI in Precision Diagnosis.Cancers · 2025Review
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
backgroundOur objective is to explore the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in determining the preoperative T and N staging, pathological stage, and the length of esophageal tumor in patients with esophageal cancer.
methodsThis retrospective analysis included 57 patients admitted to the Department of Thoracic Surgery of The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University between January 2015 and December 2016. Postoperative pathological results were used as the reference to verify the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging in evaluating tumor T and N staging, pathological stage, and tumor length. The correlation between tumor lengths-measured using magnetic resonance imaging and the surgical specimen measurements-was evaluated.
resultsThe mean age of the patients was 64.6 ± 7.2 years, with a range of 47 to 77 years. The overall accuracy rate of magnetic resonance imaging in T staging of esophageal cancer was 63.2%; magnetic resonance imaging was generally consistent in the N staging of esophageal cancer. Magnetic resonance imaging and surgical evaluation of tumor length were in excellent agreement (κ = .82,
conclusionMagnetic resonance imaging is highly accurate in determining the preoperative T and N staging, pathologic stage, and tumor length in patients with esophageal cancer, which is important in deciding the choice of preoperative treatment and the surgical approach.
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.