Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42803791›Full record

ReviewRadiologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2026

[Intraspinal extradural tumors].

Josef Mohamad

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Josef MohamadKlinik für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Neuroradiologie, Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes, Kirrberger Straße 1, 66424, Homburg/Saar, Deutschland. josef.mohamad@uks.eu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

clinical issueIntraspinal extradural lesions represent the most frequent group of spinal tumors and comprise a broad spectrum of primary and secondary neoplasms as well as intradural extramedullary tumors with secondary extradural extension. Because even small epidural lesions can cause significant neurological deficits through compression of the spinal cord or cauda equina, a prompt and accurate diagnosis is essential. RADIOLOGICAL STANDARD PROCEDURES: Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the imaging modality of first choice as it enables a reliable assessment of the tumor extent, the relationship to the spinal cord, dural sac and nerve roots as well as possible bone marrow infiltration. Characteristic imaging features, such as the origin of the mass, dorsal cortical destruction, neural foraminal widening or a dumbbell-shaped growth pattern, often enable a targeted narrowing down of the underlying tumor entity. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: In adults secondary epidural tumors should be primarily considered in the differential diagnosis as they account for the majority of intraspinal extradural masses. In particular, metastases, plasma cell neoplasms and lymphomas are of high clinical relevance. A systematic assessment of the anatomical location, growth pattern and possible osseous alterations are essential to narrow down the differential diagnosis and to guide appropriate further diagnostic evaluation and treatment planning.

Indexed as

Epidural spaceLymphomaMetastasesPlasmocytomaSpinal tumors

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.