ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2024
Endovaginal coil for pelvic high-resolution magnetic resonance imaging of cervical cancer: a preliminary parameter optimization study.
Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 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.
- Study on the diagnostic value of 3.0 T endovaginal coil magnetic resonance imaging technique for early cervical cancer.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Endovaginal coil combined with pelvic array coil magnetic resonance imaging for the preoperative staging of cervical cancer.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The diagnosis of early-stage cervical cancer through conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) remains challenging, highlighting a greater need for pelvic high-resolution MRI (HR MRI). This study used our research team's endovaginal coil imaging to optimize scanning parameters and aimed to achieve HR MRI of the pelvis and determine its clinical value. Methods: Fifty participants were recruited prospectively for this cross-sectional study conducted at the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University from January 2023 to November 2023. Initially, 10 volunteers requiring pelvic imaging diagnosis underwent pelvic MRI with the endovaginal coil combined with a conventional external array coil to test and optimize the scanning parameters. Subsequently, 40 patients who were highly suspected or diagnosed with cervical cancer were randomly assigned to undergo an initial pelvic scan with an external array coil with subsequent examinations of both the conventional coil and the endovaginal coil. Two experienced radiologists performed quantitative analyses, measuring signals and calculating the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and contrast (C). They also conducted qualitative analyses, evaluating imaging artifacts, anatomical structures, and overall image quality. The paired sample Results: The optimized endovaginal images had higher mean SNR, CNR, and C values (18.62±7.85, 16.04±7.72, and 0.73±0.11, respectively) compared to the conventional images (6.77±2.36, 4.47±2.05, and 0.47±0.12, respectively). Additionally, the ratings for imaging artifacts, anatomical structures, and overall quality of the endovaginal images were all 4 [interquartile range (IQR) 4, 4]; meanwhile, the conventional images scored lower with ratings of 4 (IQR 3, 4), 3 (IQR 3, 3), and 3 (IQR 3, 3) for SNR, CNR, and C, respectively. All analysis results underwent paired-sample Conclusions: Endovaginal technology, which provides precise clinical information for the diagnosis of cervical cancer, provides straightforward operation and exceptional imaging quality, making it highly suitable for expanded clinical use.
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.