ArticleBMC gastroenterology2022
Endoluminal ultrasound versus magnetic resonance imaging in assessment of rectal cancer after neoadjuvant therapy.
Article in BMC gastroenterology, 2022. 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, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of enhanced recovery after surgery-based anesthesia resuscitation on awakening quality in da Vinci robotic rectal cancer surgery.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2025Article
- Contrast-Enhanced Endoscopic Ultrasound Detects Early Therapy Response Following Anti-TNF Therapy in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis.Journal of Crohn's & colitis · 2024Article
- Review
- The role of superior hemorrhoidal vein ectasia in the preoperative staging of rectal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 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
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate rectal tumor staging guides the choice of treatment options. EUS and MRI are the main modalities for staging. AIM OF THE WORK: To compare the performance of EUS and MRI for loco-regional staging of anorectal cancer after neo-adjuvant therapy.
methodsSeventy-three (37 male, 36 female) patients with rectal cancer after neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy were enrolled. Histopathological staging after surgery were used as reference for comparing the yield of loco-regional staging for EUS and MRI. EUS and MRI were done 1 month after completion of neo-adjuvant therapy.
resultsRegarding post-surgical T staging, eight patients had early tumor (T2 = 16 and T1 = 9) and thirty six were locally advanced (T3 = 36), while N staging, forty patients with negative nodes and 33 were positive (N1 = 22 and N2 = 11). Comparing EUS to MRI, it showed a higher sensitivity (95.7% vs. 78.7%), specificity (84.6% vs. 68.0%) and accuracy (91.8% vs. 75.3%) for staging early and locally advanced tumor. Also, it had a higher sensitivity (78.8% vs. 69.7%), specificity (75.0% vs. 65.0%) and accuracy (76.7% vs. 67.1%) for detection of lymph nodes.
conclusionEUS appears to be more accurate than MRI in loco-regional staging of rectal carcinoma after neo-adjuvant therapy.
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.