Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34306753›Full record

ArticleRadiology research and practice2021

Comparison of MRI and CT in the Evaluation of Unilateral Maxillary Sinus Opacification.

Elise Chua, Annakan V Navaratnam, Dominic St Leger, Vincent Lam, Samit Unadkat, Alexander Weller

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiology research and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Elise ChuaDepartments of Radiology, Northwick Park and Central Middlesex Hospitals, London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust, Watford Road, Harrow HA1 3UJ, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7835-1359
Annakan V NavaratnamDepartments of ENT Surgery, Northwick Park and Central Middlesex Hospitals, London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust, Watford Road, Harrow HA1 3UJ, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7387-9464
Dominic St LegerDepartments of Radiology, Northwick Park and Central Middlesex Hospitals, London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust, Watford Road, Harrow HA1 3UJ, UK.
Vincent LamDepartments of Radiology, Northwick Park and Central Middlesex Hospitals, London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust, Watford Road, Harrow HA1 3UJ, UK.
Samit UnadkatRoyal National Throat, Nose and Ear Hospital, University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, 47-49 Huntley Street, London WC1E 6DG, UK.
Alexander WellerDepartments of Radiology, Northwick Park and Central Middlesex Hospitals, London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust, Watford Road, Harrow HA1 3UJ, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0506-5236
London North West Healthcare NHS Trust · GBSt George's Hospital · GBUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the diagnostic performance of MRI compared with CT in differentiating neoplastic from infectious/inflammatory causes of complete unilateral maxillary sinus opacification (UMSO). Although MRI is increasingly used, no studies validate its utility compared to CT or nasal endoscopy in this context.

methodsA retrospective analysis of 49 patients presenting with complete UMSO to a tertiary referral centre was performed, investigated with both CT and MRI. Two head and neck radiologists independently reviewed each imaging modality and recorded both a final diagnosis and Likert-scale diagnostic certainty score. A consensus radiological diagnosis was determined, stratified into potentially neoplastic or infectious/inflammatory aetiology, and compared with nasal endoscopy and final diagnosis. Diagnostic performance and interoperator agreement for predicting neoplasia were calculated.

resultsBoth CT and MRI demonstrated high sensitivity and negative predictive value for neoplasm, although MRI was more specific (79%; 95% CI: 60-92%) than CT (14%; 95% CI: 4-32%), with a higher positive predictive value. MRI was more accurate (88%; 95% CI: 75-95%) than CT (49%; 95% CI: 34-64%) in diagnosing neoplasia. MRI had significantly higher diagnostic certainty Likert scores than CT (

conclusionsMRI is more specific than CT in characterising UMSO, with greater diagnostic certainty and reproducibility. The additive diagnostic value of MRI complements CT, potentially reducing diagnostic delays in some cases and the need for diagnostic endoscopic sinus surgery in others. We recommend MRI incorporation into the diagnostic pathway for patients with UMSO.

Identifiers

PMID34306753
PMCPMC8285193
OpenAlexW3182972575

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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 Socratic graph.