Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31853752›Full record

ReviewInsights into imaging2019

Elucidating vaginal fistulas on CT and MRI.

Massimo Tonolini

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Insights into imaging, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. [Postoperative Imaging Findings of Colorectal Surgery: A Pictorial Essay].Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology · 2024
    Review
  7. Robotic management of urinary fistula.Asian journal of urology · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Massimo TonoliniDepartment of Radiology, "Luigi Sacco" University Hospital, Via G.B. Grassi 74, 20157, Milan, Italy. mtonolini@sirm.org.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9900-1801
Luigi Sacco Hospital · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vaginal fistulas (VF) represent abnormal communications between the vagina and either the distal portion of the digestive system or the lower urinary tract, but lack an accepted classification and standardised terminology. Regardless of the underlying cause, these uncommon disorders result in profound physical, psychological, sexual and social distress to the patients.Since diagnosis of VF is challenging at gynaecologic examination, ano-proctoscopy and urethro-cystoscopy, imaging is crucial to confirm the fistula, to visualise its site, course and involved organ, and to characterise the underlying disease. The traditional conventional radiographic studies provided limited cross-sectional information and are nowadays largely replaced by CT and MRI studies.Aiming to provide radiologists with an increased familiarity with VF, this pictorial paper summarises their clinical features, pathogenesis and therapeutic approach, and presents the appropriate CT and MRI acquisition and interpretation techniques that vary according to the anatomic site and termination of the fistula. The current role of state-of-the art CT and MRI is presented with examples regarding both entero- (involving the colon, rectum and anus) and urinary (connecting the bladder, distal ureter or urethra) VF. The resulting combined anatomic and functional cross-sectional information is crucial to allow a correct therapeutic choice and surgical planning.

Indexed as

Computed tomographyFistulaIatrogenic injuryMagnetic resonance imagingVagina

Identifiers

PMID31853752
PMCPMC6920276
OpenAlexW2994758886

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.