SynthesisDento maxillo facial radiology2022
Accuracy of MRI, CT, and Ultrasound imaging on thickness and depth of oral primary carcinomas invasion: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Dento maxillo facial radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Selective Class-Aware Refinement (SCAR) Method for Microrobot Detection in Ultrasound Images.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Preoperative Staging in Oral Cavity Cancer: Nationwide Practice and Concordance With Pathology.Oral diseases · 2026Article
- Trends in Head and Neck Cancer: Oral Cavity Carcinoma and What the Radiologist Needs to Know.Radiology. Imaging cancer · 2025Review
- Three-dimensional measurement of the depth of invasion in oral squamous cell carcinoma samples using Lugol's iodine-enhanced micro-computed tomography: an original study.Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB · 2025Article
- Imaging the Micron: New Directions in Diagnosis with Ultra-High-Frequency Ultrasound.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- The Reliability of Ultrasonographic Assessment of Depth of Invasion: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this study was to perform a systematic review to assess the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), and intraoral ultrasound (US) to determine the depth of invasion (DOI) and/or tumor thickness (TT) in oral cavity cancers, with histopathological evaluation as the gold standard.
methodsArticles whose primary objective was to evaluate the accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) of MRI, CT, and US imaging to assess DOI and/or TT were searched in six major electronic databases, in addition to three grey literature databases. The methodological quality of the selected studies was evaluated by using the Quality Assessment Tool for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2.
resultsTwelve studies met the inclusion criteria and underwent qualitative analysis: six studies on MRI, three on US, and one on CT. The accuracy values for MRI ranged from 67 to 83%, with sensitivity values above 80% and specificity above 75%. For US, mean values of sensitivity ranged from 91 to 93%. For CT, accuracy was 75%.
conclusionsFor the application of US, CT, MRI, good accuracy was reported in DOI and/or TT, as evaluated in the preoperative period. US offered advantages for detection of small lesions.
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.