SynthesisThe British journal of radiology2026
Whole-body MRI for staging and follow-up of primary musculoskeletal tumours: a systematic review.
Synthesis in The British journal of radiology, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the performance and technical parameters of whole body (WB)-MRI for staging and follow-up of primary musculoskeletal tumours.
methodsA systematic review was done in PubMed and Embase through July 2025. Eligible studies reported WB-MRI for staging or follow-up of bone/soft tissue sarcomas. Extracted data were study design, patient characteristics, MRI protocols, scan duration, and diagnostic performance. Methodological quality was assessed with QualSyst.
resultsA total of 10 studies, published between 2016 and 2024, were included from 432 records. Most were retrospective (90%), with study populations ranging from 9 to 319 patients (total n = 790, age range 2-80 years). Half of the studies focused on myxoid liposarcoma, while others addressed osteosarcoma, Ewing sarcoma, and chondrosarcoma. WB-MRI protocols employed 1.5T and/or 3T scanners. Non-contrast protocols (8/10 studies) mostly included T1 and STIR sequences. Exam durations ranged from 30 to 78 minutes, with outliers up to 250 minutes. Reference standards included CT, PET-CT, and bone scintigraphy. Diagnostic accuracy was investigated in only 2 studies, reporting 100% sensitivity, 96.3% specificity, and 97.3% accuracy for extrapulmonary metastases, 83%-88% sensitivity and 94%-95% specificity for bone metastases. The studies demonstrated high methodological rigour, with scores ranging from 16 to 19 out of 20.
conclusionsWB-MRI is a feasible and promising modality for staging and follow-up of primary musculoskeletal tumours. Evidence is still limited, based on heterogeneous and mostly retrospective studies. Larger, prospective, and standardized studies are needed to validate its accuracy, optimize imaging protocols and clarify its role in sarcoma imaging. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: WB-MRI has been tested scarcely as a comprehensive, non-ionizing alternative for whole-body staging in selected patients with primary musculoskeletal tumours, mostly using unenhanced T1 and STIR sequences, with limited use of contrast media. Current evidence is insufficient to recommend routine use of WB-MRI, standardized protocols and prospective validation are needed.
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.