ReviewInsights into imaging2024
How to update esophageal masses imaging using literature review (MRI and CT features).
Review in Insights into imaging, 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.
- Prediction of Tracheobronchial Invasion in ycT3 Esophageal Cancer Using Contact Angle on Preoperative CT Images: A Multicenter Analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- MRI outperforms CT for tracheal and vascular invasion staging in esophageal cancer.European radiology · 2026Article
- Spatial associations between esophageal lesions and surrounding tissues in esophageal fistula: a CAM-guided radiomics study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Preoperative esophageal cancer staging assessment based on intravoxel incoherent motion and apparent diffusion coefficient: a comparative study of maximum-diameter slice region of interest and whole volume of interest analysis.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- Salvage esophagectomy for unresectable locally advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: Significant or not?Annals of gastroenterological surgery · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
MRI offers new opportunities for detailed visualization of the different layers of the esophageal wall, as well as early detection and accurate characterization of esophageal lesions. Staging of esophageal tumors including extramural extent of disease, and status of the adjacent organ can also be performed by MRI with higher accuracy compared to other imaging modalities including CT and esophageal endoscopy. Although MDCT appears to be the primary imaging modality that is indicated for preoperative staging of esophageal cancer to assess tumor resectability, MDCT is considered less accurate in T staging. This review aims to update radiologists about emerging imaging techniques and the imaging features of various esophageal masses, emphasizing the imaging features that differentiate between esophageal masses, demonstrating the critical role of MRI in esophageal masses. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: MRI features may help differentiate mucosal high-grade neoplasia from early invasive squamous cell cancer of the esophagus, also esophageal GISTs from leiomyomas, and esophageal malignant melanoma has typical MR features. KEY POINTS: MRI can accurately visualize different layers of the esophagus potentially has a role in T staging. MR may accurately delineate esophageal fistulae, especially small mediastinal fistulae. MRI features of various esophageal masses are helpful in the differentiation.
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.