ArticleScientific reports2024
Study on the value of MRI in locating the internal OS of the cervix and influencing factors.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The position of the internal os of the cervix reported in the literature was inconsistent on MRI images. Additionally, the practical impactful data influencing the internal os located by MRI is limited. We aimed to confirm the position of the internal os of the cervix on MRI images, and the influencing factors locating the the internal os by MRI. A single-center retrospective study was conducted. Data from 175 patients who underwent total hysterectomy for stage I endometrial cancer were collected. The internal os of the cervix is positioned as the starting point for measuring the length of the cervix on MRI images. On dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI), the section formed by the enhancement difference between the uterus and cervix, and on T2-weighted imaging(T2WI), the section formed by the physiological curvature of the uterus and the low signal intensity of the cervical stroma were used as starting points. The results showed no statistically significant difference compared with the removed uterus specimens (p = 0.208, p = 0.571, p = 0.804). A history of cesarean section(p < 0.001), irregular vaginal bleeding for more than three months(p < 0.001), cervical adenomyosis(p = 0.043), and premenopause(p = 0.001) were not conducive to locating the internal os of the cervix by MRI. Our findings provide valuable information and confirm the position of the internal os of the cervix on MRI images, and the several important infuencing factors. We hope that some patients will benefit from our study.
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.