ReviewCureus2022
CT Colonography and Colorectal Carcinoma: Current Trends and Emerging Developments.
Review in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic performance of photon-counting detector CT versus energy-integrating detector CT for colorectal polyp detection: a phantom study.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Low-osmolar contrast tagging in minimally cathartic CT colonography for colorectal cancer screening: an observational study.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2025Observational
- Photoacoustic-Integrated Multimodal Approach for Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis.ACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2025Review
- Correlating Ultrastructural Changes in the Invasion Area of Colorectal Cancer with CT and MRI Imaging.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Colorectal Cancer.Cancers · 2024Review
- A Complex Case of Obstructive Jaundice in a Septuagenarian: Diagnostic Challenges and Therapeutic Strategies.Cureus · 2024Article
- Bowel Preparation Burden, Rectal Pain and Abdominal Discomfort: Perspective of Participants Undergoing CT Colonography and Colonoscopy.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2024Article
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 at 6 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal carcinoma is the third most malignant and second leading cause of death from cancer. The cruelty of this entity is that it takes decades to be symptomatic and is known to be detected late in its timeline by a screening technique. The fatality of this carcinoma only means heightened importance of screening guidelines to be laid down and strict follow-ups by the healthcare providers. A novel method, a potential competitor that could now replace the present screening techniques for colorectal carcinoma, is computed tomographic colonography (CTC) or virtual colonoscopy. Though it first came into existence in 1994, this method is yet to be deeply studied and scrutinized for it to be the next benchmark modality. This review has mainly focused on the various features of CTC. It is contrasted against the gold standard colonoscopy for its superiority, efficacy, cost-effectiveness, patient logistics, and role in detecting extra-colonic lesions. The main focus would be laid on CTC being a screening modality. The review also emphasized why there is a need for the current healthcare providers to incorporate this modality into their practice widely. Although much has been said about CTC and its various aspects of cost-effectiveness, about it being replaced or supplemented for cancer screening, a collaborative effort has to be made by both the fields of radiology and gastroenterology to investigate the outcomes of this not so new technique in daily practice and to avoid misinterpretation of the results due to lack of skill and proficiency.
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.