ReviewInsights into imaging2025
Diagnostic performance of CT for extrarenal fat invasion in renal cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis and systematic review.
Review in Insights into imaging, 2025. 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.
- Staging and imaging-based prognostication in renal cell carcinoma: current guidelines and practical considerations.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
- Noninvasive prediction of occult pT3a upstaging in localized ccRCC with radiogenomic insights and prognostic relevance.NPJ precision oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesRenal cell carcinoma (RCC) with extrarenal fat (perinephric or renal sinus fat) invasion is the main evidence for the T3a stage. Currently, computed tomography (CT) is still the primary modality for staging RCC. This study aims to determine the diagnostic performance of CT in RCC patients with extrarenal fat invasion.
methodsThe PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases were systematically searched up to October 11, 2023. Study quality was assessed by the QUADAS-2 tool. Standard methods recommended for meta-analyses of diagnostic evaluation were used. Heterogeneity was analyzed through meta-regression analysis.
resultsFifteen studies were included in this meta-analysis. Among them, six studies focused on perinephric fat invasion (PFI) only, four on renal sinus fat invasion (RSFI) only, and five on both. Pooled weighted estimates of sensitivity, specificity, area of SROC curve, PLR, and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) of CT for PFI were 0.69 (95% CI: 0.55-0.79), 0.82 (95% CI: 0.69-0.90), 0.81 (95% CI: 0.77-0.84), 3.85 (95% CI: 2.22-6.67), and 0.38 (95% CI: 0.27-0.55). Pooled weighted estimates of sensitivity, specificity, area of SROC curve, PLR, and NLR of CT for RSFI were 0.81 (95% CI: 0.76-0.85), 0.79 (95% CI: 0.66-0.88), 0.82 (95% CI: 0.78-0.85), 3.91 (95% CI: 2.26-6.77), and 0.24 (95% CI: 0.18-0.31).
conclusionCT has the ability to detect the PFI and RSFI in patients with RCC. However, the diagnostic performance of CT has suffered from the limitation of slightly lower accuracy, resulting from the low positive sample in the current studies. Additionally, the current PLR is low. CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: This study provides radiologists and urologists with a systematic and comprehensive summary of CT and CT-related morphological features in assessing extrarenal fat invasion in patients with RCC. KEY POINTS: CT can detect extrarenal fat invasion in patients with RCC, but the diagnostic performance is inconsistent. The diagnostic performance of CT is acceptable, but primarily affected by the low positive rate of included patients. Further large-scale trials are necessary to determine the true diagnostic capabilities of CT for extrarenal fat invasion.
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.