ArticleThe British journal of radiology2020
The incidence and diagnostic relevance of chemical shift artefact in the magnetic resonance imaging characterisation of superficial soft tissue masses.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pediatric morphea: MRI evaluation of superficial and deep tissue involvement and impact in clinical practice.Pediatric radiology · 2026Article
- Image characteristics of retained medullary cord in secondary neurulation arrest: an observational study.Scientific reports · 2024Observational
- Prevalence ofCurrent issues in molecular biology · 2024Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging of trunk and extremity myxoid liposarcoma: diagnosis, staging, and response to treatment.Skeletal radiology · 2021Review
- MRI and muscle imaging for idiopathic inflammatory myopathies.Brain pathology (Zurich, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Accuracy of ultrasound in the characterisation of deep soft tissue masses: a prospective study.European radiology · 2020Article
- Description of the MRI and ultrasound imaging features of giant epidermal cysts.The British journal of radiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveChemical shift artefact (CSA) is often encountered during MRI evaluation of superficial soft tissue masses. The study aim was to determine the incidence and diagnostic relevance of CSA in a consecutive series of superficial soft tissue masses referred to a specialist musculoskeletal sarcoma service.
methodsAll patients referred over a 6 month period with a non-lipomatous superficial soft tissue mass were prospectively analysed. Patients characteristics (age, gender), lesion features (anatomical location, size, relationship to the skin and deep fascia), presence of CSA and final histopathological diagnosis were collected. The presence of CSA was statistically analysed against these clinical, imaging and histopathological variables.
results128 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria [63 males, 65 females; mean age = 50.6 years (7-96 years)]. CSA was present in 50 cases (39.1%) overall, but in 39 (41.5%) of 94 cases with histological diagnosis. There was no statistically significant relationship to any assessed variable apart from relationship to the deep fascia, CSA being more frequent in lesions contacting the fascia compared to lesions contacting both skin and fascia (
conclusionThe presence of CSA is a not infrequent finding in the MRI assessment of superficial soft tissue masses but does not appear to be of any significance in differentiating between non-malignant and malignant lesions. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: CSA is a relatively common finding in association with superficial soft tissue masses, but does not indicate a particular histological diagnosis or help in the differentiation of non-malignant from malignant lesions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.