ArticleSkeletal radiology2020
The accuracy of a novel sonographic scanning and reporting protocol to survey for soft tissue sarcoma local recurrence.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Guideline
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging or Ultrasound in Localized Intermediate- or High-Risk Soft Tissue Tumors of the Extremities (MUSTT): Final Results of a Prospective Comparative Trial.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to determine the accuracy of a novel ultrasonography (US) scanning and reporting protocol to detect recurrences. The secondary aim is to compare US and MRI accuracy and agreement. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this IRB-approved prospective study, consecutive patients presenting for MRI surveillance after resection were enrolled and underwent same-day US. Blinded to clinical information and the MRI, the US scanner characterized lesions using a proposed novel lexicon. Outcome was defined either by histology or a subsequent MRI scan confirming the presence or absence of recurrence. Fisher's exact test and Kappa test were performed to assess of the significance and agreement between US, MRI, and outcome.
resultsA total of 68 US scans were performed on 55 patients. The overall accuracy to diagnose recurrence was the same for US and MRI (92.6%) while US was less sensitive (75.0% vs. 91.7%) but more specific (97.6% vs. 92.9%) than MRI. The two lesions missed by US but not MRI were an entirely intraosseous metastasis and a subcentimeter skin nodule. There was strong agreement between US and MRI with outcome (k = 0.787 and 0.801, respectively).
conclusionsThese pilot data suggest the accuracy of this novel US local recurrence surveillance method is comparable to MRI. A multi-institutional prospective trial would increase power and determine reproducibility.
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.