ArticleCancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.)2023
Comparison of flexible endoscopy and magnetic resonance imaging in determining the tumor height in rectal cancer.
Article in Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating Extended Field of View Imaging for Measuring Rectal Tumor Lowest Boundary to Anal Verge Distance via Transrectal Biplane Ultrasound.Ultrasound international open · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Value of Plasma Long Non-coding SLC26A4 Antisense RNA 1 Combined with Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Rectal Cancer.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Comparison of flexible endoscopy and magnetic resonance imaging in determining the tumor height in rectal cancer.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2023Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral modalities are available for the diagnosis of rectal cancer, including conventional gold standard rigid endoscopy and recent flexible endoscopy and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Each modality affects the management of these patients.
aimTo compare the accuracy of flexible endoscopy and MRI in the measurement of tumor height in patients with rectal cancer. METHODS AND
resultsThis study included 174 patients with rectal cancer who underwent flexible endoscopy and MRI for the measurement of tumor height. Data on patient demographics, comorbidities, treatment, and histopathology were identified and collected. We evaluate intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman plot to test the agreement between the measurements. ICC were excellent with an ICC of 89% (95%CI 48%-99%). The mean ± standard deviation of the distance from the anal verge to the distal part of the tumor was 7.73 ± .47 for flexible endoscopy and 6.21 ± 0.39 for MRI, with mean difference of 1.52 (p ˂ .001). The accordance between the two modalities was not affected by sex, age, body mass index, histopathology, or metastasis.
conclusionExcellent agreement between flexible endoscopy and MRI was noted, and no factor was found to affect such concordance.
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.