ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021
Preoperative Screening CT and PET/CT Scanning for Acral Melanoma: Is it Necessary?
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Impact of a Regional Community of Practice to Improve Quality of Melanoma Care: Setting Guidelines for Preoperative Diagnostic Imaging in Early-Stage Melanoma.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Recent advancements in the diagnosis and treatment of acral melanoma.Journal of Zhejiang University. Science. B · 2024Review
- Diagnostic value of 18 F-fluoro-2-deoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging in acral melanoma-predominant Asian patients.Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The efficacy of preoperative imaging for acral melanoma (AM) has not been fully evaluated. We examined the accuracy of imaging modalities in the detection of nodal and distant metastases in patients with AM. A retrospective review of 109 patients with AM was performed. All patients had no clinical signs suggestive of distant metastases, and underwent preoperative screening computed tomography (CT) and positron emission tomography (PET)/CT scans. Of 100 patients without lymphadenopathy, 17 patients were suspected of having nodal metastasis in CT and PET/CT, but only two of them were confirmed on histopathological analysis. On the other hand, 12 out of 83 negatively imaged patients showed histopathological signs of nodal metastasis; thus, the sensitivity and specificity of nodal detection were 14.3% and 82.6%, respectively. Regard to the detection of distant metastases, four patients were suspected of having metastasis, but this was later ruled out. The remaining 96 negatively imaged patients were confirmed to have no metastasis at the time of CT and PET/CT by the follow-up. In contrast, distant metastases were found by CT and PET/CT in four of nine patients (44.4%) with lymphadenopathy. Routine preoperative CT and PET/CT for AM patients without lymphadenopathy may not be warranted because of low sensitivity and specificity, but it can be considered for those with lymphadenopathy.
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.