ArticleOral radiology2026
Minimum fascia-tumor distance of parotid tumors: a comparison of ultrasound and computed tomography.
Article in Oral radiology, 2026. 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.
- Extracapsular dissection versus superficial parotidectomy: real-world comparison of postoperative complications and facial nerve injury.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Multiparametric ultrasonography, elastography, and the Milan System for reporting salivary gland cytopathology in the preoperative evaluation of major salivary gland tumors.Frontiers in 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe minimum fascia-tumor distance (MFTD) measured by ultrasound (US) has been proposed for detecting deep lobe parotid tumors, but probe compression may cause measurement bias. Computed tomography (CT), free from such distortion, may provide more reliable measurements. This study compared MFTD values from CT and US in the same cohort.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 128 parotid tumor patients who underwent both CT and US before surgery. MFTD values were compared, correlation and agreement were assessed with Spearman coefficients and Bland-Altman plots, and diagnostic accuracy was evaluated using ROC curves.
resultsCT-based MFTD values were significantly larger than US-based values (2.00 ± 2.64 mm vs. 1.49 ± 1.86 mm, P < 0.001), with a mean difference of 0.51 mm. This discrepancy increased with tumor depth. A strong correlation was observed between CT and US (r = 0.936, P < 0.001), but agreement was not optimal. ROC analysis showed comparable performance of CT and US in differentiating deep from superficial lobe tumors (AUC = 0.723 vs. 0.712, P = 0.910), with optimal cutoffs of 4.00 mm for CT and 3.40 mm for US.
conclusionCT-based MFTD values were consistently larger than those from US, supporting the presence of probe compression-related bias. Nevertheless, both modalities demonstrated similar accuracy for tumor localization. With appropriate cutoff adjustments, CT and US can both serve as effective tools for preoperative identification of deep lobe parotid tumors. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3:
Indexed as
Identifiers
41511699What 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.