SynthesisAbdominal radiology (New York)2024
Differentiating malignant from benign splenic lesions: a meta-analysis and pictorial review of imaging features.
Synthesis in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Common and Uncommon Splenic Lesions: A Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Incidental Diffuse Splenic Polyangiomatosis With Long-Term Radiologic Stability: A Case Report.Cureus · 2026Article
- Radiological Approach to Splenomegaly: Etiologies, Pathophysiologies, and Diagnostic Strategies.Korean journal of radiology · 2026Review
- Epidemiology of Splenic Lesions in Dogs Undergoing Splenectomy-Pathological Characterization and Risk Factors.Veterinary sciences · 2026Article
- An Isolated Hydatid Cyst of the Spleen with High Serum Levels of CA 19-9-A Meaningful Association or Just a Challenge for Diagnosis? A Case Report.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesSplenic lesions might exhibit overlapping imaging features, varying from benign entities like cysts and hemangiomas to malignancies such as lymphoma and angiosarcoma. This meta-analysis aims to delineate imaging characteristics that distinguish malignant from benign splenic lesions.
methodsAdhering to PRISMA guidelines, we searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for studies on imaging features differentiating malignant from benign splenic lesions. We extracted data on splenic pathology and imaging characteristics and assessed the methodological quality via QUADAS-2. Odds ratio meta-analyses were performed using STATA (Version 17.0, Stata Corp, College Station, TX).
resultsPortal phase hypoenhancement, hypovascular enhancement pattern, diffusion restriction, and late phase hypoenhancement, with odds ratios above 10, highly indicate malignancy. Other features suggestive of malignancy include solid morphology, lymphadenopathy, presence of perisplenic fluid, arterial hypoenhancement, hypoechogenicity on ultrasound, splenomegaly, and presence of multiple lesions. In contrast, cystic morphology, hypervascular-washout and hypervascular-persistent pattern of enhancement, late phase hyperenhancement, anechogenicity on ultrasound, portal phase hyperenhancement, well-defined borders, and calcification are in favour of benign pathology.
conclusionThe study underscores the critical role of contrast-enhanced and diffusion-weighted imaging in distinguishing malignant from benign splenic lesions, emphasizing the role of features like portal phase hypoenhancement and restricted diffusion in diagnosing malignancies. Additionally, the study emphasizes the value of contrast-enhanced ultrasound, which allows for the visualization of key contrast-enhancement patterns without the risk of ionizing radiation exposure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38900328What 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.