ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Assessing PET-CT versus conventional CT: a meta-analysis on diagnostic efficacy, prognosis, and post-surgical wound healing in lung mucosal marginal zone lymphoma.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy of positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) and conventional CT in assessing the clinical pathological features, prognosis, and post-surgical wound healing in Lung Mucosal Marginal Zone Lymphoma (LMMZL). Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted across databases including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, culminating in the inclusion of 7 studies representing 353 LMMZL patients. Mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) for continuous data, and risk ratio (RR) or odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous data, were used for the meta-analysis, all with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: PET-CT demonstrated a superior lesion detection rate (LDR) with an SMD of 7.10 (95% CI: 3.17 to 11.02, Conclusion: PET-CT emerges as a potentially superior diagnostic tool over conventional CT in evaluating the clinical features, prognosis, and post-surgical wound healing in LMMZL. These findings indicated the advanced imaging techniques on enhancing surgical precision and patient recovery in future diagnostic and therapeutic strategies for LMMZL.
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.