Observational studyMedicine2019
A comparable method to Gd-contrast enhancement in the preoperative evaluation of anal fistula.
Observational study in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of contrast-enhanced fat-suppressed T1-3D-VIBE and T1-TSE MRI in evaluating anal fistula.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To explore a comparable method to Gd-contrast enhancement in the preoperative evaluation of anal fistula to evaluate its morphology changes.Forty-six patients with anal fistula were enrolled. Each patient acquired a 3.0T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) routine sequence, diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) sequence and fat suppression T1 weighted imaging (FS T1WI) contrast enhancement (CE) scanning. To record the morphology performances of the internal orifice and the fistulas on the transverse images of fat suppression T2 weighted imaging (FS T2WI), DWI, FS T2WI combined with DWI, FS T1WI Gd-CE, with the standard of the surgical pathology results. Two observers evaluated images in consensus. The conspicuity and the diagnostic performance rate were compared between the 4 imaging data sets.The consistencies of interobservers about the conspicuity scores and the diagnostic performance rates of the internal orifice and the fistula were good. The conspicuity of the internal orifice was higher for the set of FS T2WI, FS T2WI+DWI, and FS T1WI+CE than DWI. The diagnostic performance rate of the internal orifice was higher for the set of FS T2WI, FS T2WI+DWI, and FS T1WI+CE than DWI. The conspicuity of the fistula was higher for the set of FS T2WI+DWI and FS T1WI+CE than FS T2WI or DWI. There were no significantly differences between the 4 sets of FS T2WI, DWI, FS T2WI+DWI, and FS T1WI+CE in the diagnostic performance rate of the fistula.The set of FS T2WI combined with DWI was comparable to FS T1WI CE in evaluation of anal fistula morphology changes.
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.