ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2026
Test order, timing, and multidisciplinary review predict management change in sequential fluoroscopic and MR defecography.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo determine whether sequential fluoroscopic defecography (FLD) and MR defecography (MRD) change clinical management of patients with pelvic floor dysfunction and to identify factors associated with management change.
methodsMulti-institutional retrospective study including adults who underwent both FL and MR defecography within 3 years, without interval surgery. Primary outcome was management change attributed to the second examination. Clinical information, test order & timing, multidisciplinary review, and imaging variables were compared between patients with and without management change. Univariate analyses were performed overall and by first-modality subgroup. Multivariable logistic regression was performed in the overall cohort.
resultsOf 46 patients, 24 underwent FLD first and 22 underwent MRD first. Management changed after second examination in 23.9% (11/46). FLD-first order (adjusted OR, 72.70; 95% CI, 2.77-1909.81; p = 0.010), shorter interval between examinations (adjusted OR per 30 days, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.68-1.00; p = 0.038), and wider MR resting anorectal angle (adjusted OR per degree, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02-1.20; p = 0.016) were independent predictors of management change. MRD after FLD showed more frequent new second-test abnormalities than FLD after MRD (16/24 [66.7%] vs. 5/22 [22.7%], p = 0.0037), particularly new cystocele detection (41.7% vs. 0%, p = 0.0006). In the FLD-first subgroup, multidisciplinary review was associated with management change (5/5 [100%] vs. 5/19 [26.3%], p = 0.0059).
conclusionSequential multimodality defecography changed management in approximately one-quarter of patients. Its value was greatest when MRD followed FLD, especially when examinations were performed closely together. MRD after FLD detected a higher frequency of second-test abnormalities, particularly cystocele. The association between multidisciplinary review and management change suggests that the clinical impact of sequential defecography depends not only on the added imaging findings but also on how they are integrated into treatment planning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42878795What 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.