ArticleJournal of clinical imaging science2026
Computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging features of struma ovarii: A retrospective case series.
Article in Journal of clinical imaging science, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Struma ovarii (SO) is an extremely rare clinical condition. This study retrospectively analyzes clinical and imaging data from 11 misdiagnosed cases of struma ovarii to identify key diagnostic and differential imaging features. Material and Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on the clinical and imaging features of 11 patients with initially misdiagnosed but postoperatively confirmed ovarian struma, who were treated at our hospital. Imaging features analyzed included lesion size, computed tomography (CT) density, calcification status, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) signal characteristics (cystic/solid components), enhancement intensity, and lymph node or distant metastasis. Clinical features analyzed comprised patient symptoms and laboratory test results. Results: All 11 unilateral ovarian lesions measured 10.77 ± 4.43 cm. MRI demonstrated markedly hypointense foci on T2-weighted images in the cyst wall septa in 90.9% of cases (10/11), isointense to mildly hyperintense signal on T1-weighted images in cystic cavities in 63.6% (7/11), and small to moderate volume ascites in 81.8% (9/11). On contrast-enhanced MRI, the solid components exhibited a honeycomb-like enhancement pattern: enhancement was comparable to the myometrium in 4 cases, greater in 4 cases, and slightly lower in 3 cases. One case demonstrated restricted diffusion on diffusion-weighted imaging along with multiple pelvic disseminated nodules. On non-contrast CT, all cases showed slightly high-density foci (66.56 ± 8.23 HU), with punctate or nodular calcifications in 54.5% (6/11). In the subset of three patients who underwent contrast-enhanced CT, marked enhancement of the solid components was observed in all cases. Conclusion: The radiological manifestations of SO demonstrate distinct characteristic features. When combined with clinical findings, these imaging features may assist in diagnosis and improve diagnostic accuracy.
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.