ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2026
Local recurrence in rectal cancer: from detection to structured reporting.
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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite advances in total mesorectal excision and neoadjuvant therapy, locally recurrent rectal cancer remains a clinically important source of pelvic morbidity and cancer-related mortality, affecting approximately 2-10% of the treated patients. Most recurrences develop within three years of surgery and often arise near the surgical bed, where fibrosis and distorted anatomy can delay detection. Early recognition is critical because complete R0 resection offers the best chance of durable disease control and survival. Imaging provides the anatomic and functional information required to diagnose pelvic recurrence and guide multidisciplinary management. Contrast-enhanced CT of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis is typically used for routine surveillance and often provides the first radiologic suspicion of recurrence, particularly by detecting distant metastases or pelvic disease. However, CT has a limited ability to distinguish viable tumor from postoperative or post-radiation fibrosis in the pelvis. Suspicious or equivocal CT findings should therefore prompt high-resolution pelvic MRI using a recurrence protocol. MRI, including T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and contrast-enhanced sequences, is the preferred modality for local characterization and staging. MRI helps differentiate recurrent tumor from fibrosis, defines locoregional extent, and evaluates involvement of adjacent structures that directly influence resectability. For posterior compartment recurrence, dedicated musculoskeletal MRI of the sacrum may further delineate marrow infiltration, cortical involvement, sacral foraminal invasion, and nerve root extension, supporting surgical planning and margin assessment. FDG-PET/CT is useful when CT or MRI findings are equivocal and for excluding unsuspected metastatic disease, although mucinous tumors, chronic inflammation, and small-volume disease may reduce sensitivity. Hybrid FDG-PET/MRI has shown promising performance in detecting pelvic recurrence in small studies and may reduce equivocal interpretations; however, its incremental value in evaluating perineural spread and altering surgical management has not been established. This review summarizes recurrence patterns, optimal multimodality imaging techniques, pitfalls, structured reporting, and emerging applications of functional imaging, radiomics, and artificial intelligence in the individualized management of these patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42566012What 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.