ReviewWorld journal of radiology2025
Optimizing diagnosis in obstructed defecation syndrome: A review of imaging modalities.
Review in World journal of radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS) is a complex defecatory disorder associated with pelvic floor dysfunction. It affects approximately 50% of women over the age of 50 and significantly impacts their quality of life. The causes of ODS include structural abnormalities such as rectocele, enterocele, intussusception, and pelvic floor descent, as well as functional disorders like anismus. Accurate diagnosis is crucial for effective management due to the high risk of treatment failure associated with inaccurate findings. Various imaging modalities are used to assess pelvic floor disorders, including fluoroscopic defecography (FD), magnetic resonance defecography (MRD), pelvic floor ultrasound (PFUS), and echodefecography (EDF). FD is the most commonly performed test worldwide, offering high accuracy in diagnosing pelvic floor disorders. It provides dynamic visualization of defecation mechanics but involves radiation exposure. MRD offers excellent soft tissue detail and multiplanar imaging without radiation, making it particularly useful for multicompartment disorders; however, it is associated with high procedural costs and limited availability. Both PFUS and EDF are minimally invasive and avoid radiation exposure. PFUS shows promise as a valuable screening tool that could help minimize the need for advanced imaging if findings are normal. EDF is also promising but requires specialized training and remains less widely available. This review evaluates the accuracy, advantages, and limitations of various diagnostic modalities for pelvic floor disorders, aiming to guide optimal clinical decision-making.
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.