ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2024
Peritoneal Carcinomatosis of Malignant Gynecological Origin: A Systematic Review of Imaging Assessment.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 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.
- Value of whole-body diffusion-weighted MRI for the prediction of surgical and clinical outcome after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer.British journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Morpho-Functional and Biochemical Characterization of Adrenal Masses in a Heterogeneous Cancer Population.Cancers · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic review, conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol, aims to comprehensively assess the current state of the art of imaging modalities for the evaluation of peritoneal carcinomatosis arising from malignant gynecological origins, with a focus on ovarian and endometrial cancers. A systematic search of relevant databases was performed, adhering to predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Studies reporting the use of computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET), PET/CT, and PET/MRI in the assessment of peritoneal carcinomatosis from gynecological malignancies were included. The review encompasses an overview of selected studies, highlighting the strengths and limitations of each imaging modality in diagnosing and characterizing peritoneal carcinomatosis. Overall, a wide variability in the reported accuracy of different imaging techniques emerges from literature, mainly due to the type of the study, technical issues, and patient characteristics. Although a meta-analysis could not be performed due to a scarcity of data, this systematic review provides valuable insights into the several imaging approaches used in peritoneal carcinomatosis of gynecological origin. The findings aim to inform clinical decision making and guide future research endeavors in this critical aspect of gynecological oncology.
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.