2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijom.2021.07.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging to measure the depth of invasion in oral tongue cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In agreement with those results, the present study showed an overestimation as well, even though the mean difference of 3.9 mm by MRI was slightly larger. On the contrary a subgroup analysis in a systematic review found T1‐weighted MRI images to perform substantially better with a mean difference of 0.77 mm (95% LOA −4.5–6.8) compared to T2‐weighted images with a mean difference of 2.1 mm (95% LOA −5.2–9.5) 31 . However, another important issue is that there is a considerable proportion of patients in whom MRI cannot assess the tumor or DOI at all, especially in T1 tumors 15,16,28–30 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In agreement with those results, the present study showed an overestimation as well, even though the mean difference of 3.9 mm by MRI was slightly larger. On the contrary a subgroup analysis in a systematic review found T1‐weighted MRI images to perform substantially better with a mean difference of 0.77 mm (95% LOA −4.5–6.8) compared to T2‐weighted images with a mean difference of 2.1 mm (95% LOA −5.2–9.5) 31 . However, another important issue is that there is a considerable proportion of patients in whom MRI cannot assess the tumor or DOI at all, especially in T1 tumors 15,16,28–30 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…On the contrary a subgroup analysis in a systematic review found T1‐weighted MRI images to perform substantially better with a mean difference of 0.77 mm (95% LOA −4.5–6.8) compared to T2‐weighted images with a mean difference of 2.1 mm (95% LOA −5.2–9.5). 31 However, another important issue is that there is a considerable proportion of patients in whom MRI cannot assess the tumor or DOI at all, especially in T1 tumors. 15 , 16 , 28 , 29 , 30 These circumstances and the fact that US is a well‐established method to measure tumor thickness have led to expectations in US to assess DOI in early SCCOT defined as T1–T2 according to TNM8.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The ICC coefficient was 0.86 (95% CI 0.83-0.89) for the entire group but even better in the T1WI subgroup (ICC 0.923) than T2WI subgroup (0.79). 19 Authors propose pre-operative IO-USG for all carcinoma tongue (T1-T3) to predict DOI and stage the disease accordingly. This will help in surgical planning.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The tongue is a mobile muscular organ commonly affected by squamous cell carcinoma. It has an increased risk of locoregional metastasis and recurrence following excision due to its rich blood supply and abundant lymphatic vessels[ 4 101 ] responsible for distant metastasis, disease recurrence, and associated morbidity and mortality. [ 4 101 ] DOI helps in determining tumor prognosis by predicting this metastasis, helping in better treatment planning.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%