Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35347481›Full record

ArticleInsights into imaging2022

MRI in female pelvis: an ESUR/ESR survey.

Stephanie Nougaret, Yulia Lakhman, Sophie Gourgou, Rahel Kubik-Huch, Lorenzo Derchi, Evis Sala, Rosemarie Forstner, European Society of Radiology (ESR) and the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Insights into imaging, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06144762 (Precision Imaging for Early Detection and Targeted Treatment Monitoring in Pancreatic Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT06144762 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Precision Imaging for Early Detection and Targeted Treatment Monitoring in Pancreatic Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorInstitut du Cancer de Montpellier - Val d'AurelleRan2023 to 2029Enrolled150ConditionsPancreas CancerArmsBiological/Vaccine: Blood sample and tissue sample
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

8 authors.

Stephanie NougaretIRCM, Montpellier Cancer Research Institute, 208 Ave des Apothicaires, 34295, Montpellier, France. stephanienougaret@free.fr.
Yulia LakhmanBody Imaging Service, Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Sophie GourgouDepartment of Statistics, Montpellier Cancer Institute, University of Montpellier, 208 Ave des Apothicaires, 34295, Montpellier, France.
Rahel Kubik-HuchDepartment of Radiology, Kantonsspital Baden, Baden, Switzerland.
Lorenzo DerchiUniversita Degli Studi Di Genova, Via A Pastore 1, 16132, Genoa, Italy.
Evis SalaDepartment of Radiology, Cambridge Biomedical Campus, Box 218, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.
Rosemarie ForstnerDepartment of Radiology, Universitätsklinikum Salzburg, PMU, Müllner Hauptstr. 48, 5020, Salzburg, Austria.
European Society of Radiology (ESR) and the European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR)

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748Site de Recherche Integree sur le Cancer INCa_Inserm_DGOS_12553
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesWhile magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is considered the gold standard for the imaging of female pelvis, there is an ongoing debate about the most appropriate indications and optimal imaging protocols. The European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) launched a survey to evaluate the current utilization of female pelvic MRI in clinical practice.

methodsThe ESUR female imaging subgroup developed an online survey that was then approved by the ESR board and circulated among the ESR members. The questions in the survey encompassed training and experience, indications for imaging and MR imaging protocols, reporting styles and preferences. The results of the survey were tabulated, and subgroups were compared using χ

resultsA total of 5900 ESR members with an interest in both MRI and female pelvic imaging were invited to participate; 840 (14.23%) members completed the survey. Approximately 50% of respondents were academic radiologists (50.6%) and nearly 60% women (59.69%). One third of the respondents were subspecialized in Gynecological imaging. Nearly half of the survey participants were aware of the presence of ESUR guidelines for imaging of the female pelvis (47.1%). The adoption of the ESUR recommendations was higher among subspecialized and/or academic and/or senior and/or European radiologists compared to all others. The current ESUR recommendations about female pelvic MRI protocols were generally followed. However wide variations in practice were identified with respect to the use of contrast media.

conclusionFemale pelvic MRI protocol was generally following the ESUR recommendations, especially among subspecialized and academic radiologists. However, the fact that they are followed by only half of the participants highlights the need for wider awareness of these recommendations.

Indexed as

GynaecologyMagnetic resonance imagingPractice guidelineRadiologistsSurvey and questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID35347481
PMCPMC8960522

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.