ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2023
Superiority of magnetic resonance imaging in small renal mass diagnosis where image reports mismatches between computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging.
Article in Investigative and clinical urology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perioperative Immune-Checkpoint Inhibition in Renal Cell Carcinoma: Lessons Learned and Future Directions.Cancers · 2026Review
- Impact of tumor size and sex on diagnostic discrepancies in renal mass imaging.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo analyze malignancy of computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results in the same renal mass. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 1,216 patients who underwent partial nephrectomy from January 2017 to December 2021 in our institute. Patients who had both CT and MRI reports prior to surgery were included. We compared the diagnostic accuracy between the CT and the MRI. The patients were divided into two groups according to the consistency of reports: the 'Consistent group' and the 'Inconsistent group'. The Inconsistent group was further divided into two subgroups. Group 1 is the case that showed benign findings on CT but malignancy on MRI. Group 2 is the cases of malignancy on CT but benign on MRI.
results410 patients were identified. Benign lesion was identified in 68 cases (16.6%). The sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic accuracy of MRI was 91.2%, 36.8%, and 82.2% respectively, whereas that of CT was 84.8%, 41.2%, and 77.6% respectively. Consistent group were 335 cases (81.7%) and inconsistent group were 75 cases (18.3%). The mean mass size was significantly smaller in the inconsistent group compared to the consistent group (consistent group vs. inconsistent group: 2.31±0.84 cm vs.1.84±0.75 cm, p<0.001). Also, the Group 1 had higher odds of malignancy compared to Group 2 in the renal mass size 2-4 cm (odds ratio, 5.62 [1.02-30.90]).
conclusionsSmaller mass size affects the discrepancy of CT and MRI reports. In addition, MRI showed better diagnostic performance in mismatch cases in the small renal masses.
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.