ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2021
Indirect and atypical imaging signals of endometriosis: A wide range of manifestations.
Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2021. 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.
- Endometriosis-Related Ovarian Cancer: Where Are We Now? A Narrative Review towards a Pragmatic Approach.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhilst some imaging signs of endometriosis are common and widely accepted as 'typical', a range of 'subtle' signs could be present in imaging studies, presenting an opportunity to the radiologist and the surgeon to aid the diagnosis and facilitate preoperative surgical planning.
objectiveTo summarise and analyse the current information related to indirect and atypical signs of endometriosis by ultrasound (US) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
methodsThrough the use of PubMed and Google scholar, we conducted a comprehensive review of available articles related to the diagnosis of indirect signs in transvaginal US and MRI. All abstracts were assessed and the studies were finally selected by two authors.
resultsTransvaginal US is a real time dynamic exploration, that can reach a sensitivity of 79-94% and specificity of 94%. It allows evaluation of normal sliding between structures in different compartments, searching for adhesions or fibrosis. MRI is an excellent tool that can reach a sensitivity of 94% and specificity of 77% and allows visualisation of the uterus, bowel loop deviation and peritoneal inclusion cysts. It also allows the categorisation and classification of ovarian cysts, rectovaginal and vesicovaginal septum obliteration, and small bowel endometriotic implants.
conclusionThe use of an adequate mapping protocol with systematic evaluation and the reporting of direct and indirect signs of endometriosis is crucial for detailed and safe surgical planning.
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.