Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38963431›Full record

ReviewSurgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA2024

Retroperitoneum revisited: a review of radiological literature and updated concept of retroperitoneal fascial anatomy with imaging features and correlating anatomy.

B Boekestijn, M N J M Wasser, J S D Mieog, M C DeRuiter

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Thin-Adipose Compartment at the Colonic Mesentery-Perirenal Fat Interface: Histological and Three-Dimensional Morphological Studies.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

B BoekestijnDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Leiden, 2333 ZA, The Netherlands. b.boekestijn@lumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3682-6560
M N J M WasserDepartment of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Leiden, 2333 ZA, The Netherlands.
J S D MieogDepartment of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.
M C DeRuiterDepartment of Anatomy and Embryology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSpread of disease in the retroperitoneum is dictated by the complex anatomy of retroperitoneal fasciae and is still incompletely understood. Conflicting reports have led to insufficient and incorrect anatomical concepts in radiological literature.

methodsThis review will discuss previous concepts prevalent in radiological literature and their shortcomings will be highlighted. New insights from recent anatomical and embryological research, together with imaging examples, will be used to clarify patterns of disease spread in the retroperitoneum that remain unexplained by these concepts.

resultsThe fusion fascia and the renal fascia in particular give rise to planes and spaces that act as vectors for spread of disease in the retroperitoneum. Some of these planes and structures, such as the caudal extension of the renal fascia, have previously not been described in radiological literature.

conclusionNew insights, including the various fasciae, potential spaces and planes, are incorporated into an updated combined retroperitoneal fascial concept.

Indexed as

FasciaHumansRetroperitoneal SpaceTomography, X-Ray ComputedAnatomyFasciaImagingRadiologyRetroperitoneum

Identifiers

PMID38963431
PMCPMC11246311

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.