ArticlePediatric radiology2024
The comparison of magnetic resonance and fluoroscopic imaging options in the preoperative assessment of boys with anorectal malformations and a colostomy.
Article in Pediatric radiology, 2024. 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.
- Revisiting Anatomy of Anorectal Malformations with a Symbolic AI Segmentation Method Applied on Diffusion MRI: The Lumbosacral Plexus Development and Microarchitecture Is Different in High and Low Types.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Anorectal malformations.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn recent decades, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has gained prominence as a standard diagnostic method for preoperative assessment in patients with anorectal malformations and a colostomy, with the potential to replace the classic fluoroscopic distal pressure colostogram (FDPC). Three MRI techniques are available: MRI-distal pressure colostogram with gadolinium (MRI-DPCG) or saline (MRI-DPCS) instillation into the colostomy and native MRI without colostomy instillation.
objectiveTo evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of MRI (native MRI, MRI-DPCG and MRI-DPCS) in the preoperative workup of boys with an anorectal malformation and a colostomy and to compare it to FDPC. MATERIALS AND
methodsSixty-two boys with preoperative MRI using one of the three approaches and 43 with FDPC met the inclusion criteria for this retrospective study. The presence and localization of rectal fistulas according to the Krickenbeck classification were evaluated and compared with intraoperative findings.
resultsThe accuracy of fistula detection for MRI in general (regardless of the technique), MRI-DPCS, MRI-DPCG, native MRI and FDPC was 95% (59/62, P<0.001), 100% (12/12, P=0.03), 100% (30/30, P<0.001), 85% (17/20, P=0.41) and 72% (31/43, P=0.82), respectively. The accuracy of describing fistula type in patients with a correctly detected fistula using these methods was 96% (45/47, P<0.001), 100% (9/9, P<0.001), 100% (23/23, P<0.001), 87% (13/15, P<0.001) and 67% (13/21, P=0.002), respectively.
conclusionMRI is a reliable method for detecting and classifying fistulas in boys with an anorectal malformation and a colostomy and can be considered the modality of first choice for preoperative workup.
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.