Evidence mapPaperPMID 37345136Full record

ReviewCancers2023

MR Virtual Biopsy of Solid Renal Masses: An Algorithmic Approach.

Stephane Chartier, Hina Arif-Tiwari

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2023. 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
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stephane ChartierDepartment of Medical Imaging, College of Medicine, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85724, USA.
Hina Arif-TiwariDepartment of Medical Imaging, College of Medicine, The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85724, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0837-0682
University of Arizona · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Between 1983 and 2002, the incidence of solid renal tumors increased from 7.1 to 10.8 cases per 100,000. This is in large part due to the increase in the volume of ultrasound and cross-sectional imaging, although a majority of solid renal tumors are still found incidentally. Ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) have been the mainstay of renal mass screening and diagnosis but recent advances in magnetic resonance (MR) technology have made this the optimal choice when diagnosing and staging renal tumors. Our purpose in writing this review is to survey the modern MR imaging approach to benign and malignant solid renal tumors, consolidate the various imaging findings into an easy-to-read reference, and provide an imaging-based, algorithmic approach to renal mass characterization for clinicians. MR is at the forefront of renal mass characterization, surpassing ultrasound and CT in its ability to describe multiple tissue parameters and predict tumor biology. Cutting-edge MR protocols and the integration of diagnostic algorithms can improve patient outcomes, allowing the imager to narrow the differential and better guide oncologic and surgical management.

Indexed as

angiomyolipomaimage-guided biopsylymphomaMRIoncocytomarenal cell carcinomasolid renal masstransitional cell carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID37345136
PMCPMC10216374
OpenAlexW4377108061

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.