ArticleBMC cancer2025
Sonographic characteristics of local soft tissue recurrence in primary bone tumor and diagnostic efficacy versus MRI.
Article in BMC cancer, 2025. 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.
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
Abstract
backgroundThe accurate diagnosis of local soft tissue recurrence (LR) in primary bone tumors is crucial for guiding clinical management and predicting patient outcomes. However, standardized postoperative surveillance protocols remain undefined. This study aims to compare the diagnostic efficacy of ultrasound (US) versus magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in detecting LR following primary bone tumor surgery and to characterize the sonographic features of osteosarcoma recurrence.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective review of medical records from patients who underwent postoperative surveillance for primary bone tumors at our institution between 01/06/2016 to 01/09/2023. Diagnostic performance was compared using McNemar's test for paired variables. Sonographic characteristics were analyzed using logistic regression analysis, with statistical significance set at p < 0.05.
resultsComparative analysis revealed no statistically significant differences (p > 0.05) in sensitivity, specificity, or accuracy between MRI and US, and the exact values for these parameters are provided in Table 1. Key sonographic features predictive of osteosarcoma recurrence included tumor size and anatomical location. The diagnostic model demonstrated excellent discriminative ability, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.973. The diagnostic parameters were as follows: sensitivity (96.6%), specificity (90.9%), accuracy (94.6%), positive predictive value (95.0%), and negative predictive value (93.8%).
conclusionThe findings from this study support the role of ultrasonography as a valuable tool in tumor surveillance paradigms, providing a scientific rationale for optimizing integrated management strategies in bone oncology.
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.