Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36675494›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023

Diagnostic Value of Multi-Mode Ultrasonic Flow Imaging Examination in Solid Renal Tumors of Different Sizes.

Dai Zhang, Ying Wang, Fan Yang, Yiran Mao, Jie Mu, Lihui Zhao, Wengui Xu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Dai ZhangDepartment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Ultrasonography, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin 300060, China.
Ying WangDepartment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Ultrasonography, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin 300060, China.
Fan YangDepartment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Ultrasonography, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin 300060, China.
Yiran MaoDepartment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Ultrasonography, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin 300060, China.
Jie MuDepartment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Ultrasonography, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin 300060, China.
Lihui ZhaoDepartment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Ultrasonography, Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, Tianjin 300060, China.
Wengui XuNational Clinical Research Center for Cancer, Tianjin 300060, China.
National Clinical Research Center for Digestive Diseases · CNTianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purposes: To explore the value of Microflow Imaging (MFI) in renal solid tumors. Methods: A total of 195 patients with 199 lesions pathologically confirmed masses were retrospectively analyzed. The 199 masses were divided into the tumor ≤ 4 cm group (n = 104) and tumor > 4 cm group (n = 95). The diagnostic efficacy of Color Doppler Flow Imaging (CDFI), Power Doppler Imaging (PDI) and MFI in renal tumors sizes were compared by determining the Adler grade, vascular morphology and peripheral blood flow. Results: Among 199 tumors, 161 lesions were malignant and 38 lesions were benign. MFI in malignant tumor ≤ 4 cm demonstrated statistically significant differences in Adler grade and vascular morphology as compared to CDFI and PDI (p < 0.05). In malignant tumor > 4 cm group, MFI showed significant difference in vascular morphology compared with CDFI (p < 0.05). MFI showed a significant difference in the peripheral annular blood flow of malignant tumors when compared to CDFI and PDI (p < 0.05). In addition, the malignant tumors of the two sizes by MFI in peripheral annular blood flow detection showed significant difference (p < 0.05). The area under the curve of ROC by MFI in the tumor ≤ 4 cm was 0.771, which was higher than CDFI and PDI (p < 0.05), but no obvious difference among the tumor > 4 cm (p > 0.05). Conclusion: MFI provides a new method for the differential diagnosis of small renal carcinoma. Based on the convenience and non-radiation of MFI, we can choose MFI as an imaging diagnostic tool for patients who need long-term active surveillance (AS) follow-up.

Indexed as

CDFIMFIPDIrenal tumor

Identifiers

PMID36675494
PMCPMC9860825
OpenAlexW4315572583

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.