ArticleKorean journal of radiology
Differentiating focal eosinophilic infiltration from metastasis in the liver with gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.
Article in Korean journal of radiology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-analysis of gadoxetic acid disodium (Gd-EOB-DTPA)-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging for the detection of liver metastases.PloS one · 2012Pooled it
- Focal eosinophilic infiltration of the liver, benign or malignant?Clinical case reports · 2021Article
- Differentiating Between an Atypical Hepatic Abscess and Tumor Metastasis Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Hepatobiliary Phase Imaging.Infection and drug resistance · 2021Article
- Hypereosinophilia with Hepatic Nodule Formation Caused by Ganoderma lucidum.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2021Article
- The value of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI for differentiation between hepatic microabscesses and metastases in patients with periampullary cancer.European radiology · 2017Article
- Differentiation of hepatocellular carcinoma from its various mimickers in liver magnetic resonance imaging: What are the tips when using hepatocyte-specific agents?World journal of gastroenterology · 2016Review
- Hepatic Lesions that Mimic Metastasis on Radiological Imaging during Chemotherapy for Gastrointestinal Malignancy: Recent Updates.Korean journal of radiologyReview
- Does the Reporting Quality of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies, as Defined by STARD 2015, Affect Citation?Korean journal of radiologyArticle
- MR imaging in patients with suspected liver metastases: value of liver-specific contrast agent gadoxetic acid.Korean journal of radiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the most useful findings of gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3.0 Tesla (T) MRI for differentiating focal eosinophilic infiltration (FEI) from hepatic metastasis with verification of their usefulness. MATERIALS AND
methodsPathologically or clinically proven 39 FEIs from 25 patients and 79 hepatic metastases from 51 patients were included in the study. Gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3.0T MRI was performed in all cancer patients. Size differences measured between T2-weighted and hepatobiliary-phase images for lesions > 1 cm and morphologic findings (margin, shape, signal intensity on T1- and T2-weighted images, enhancement pattern on dynamic images, and target appearance on hepatobiliary-phase images) were compared between two groups via Student's t test as well as univariate and multivariate analyses. Diagnostic predictive values of two observers for differentiating two groups were assessed before (session 1) and after (session 2) recognition of results.
resultsMean size difference (2.1 mm) in FEIs between the two images was significantly greater than for metastases (0.7 mm) (p < 0.05). An ill-defined margin and isointensity on T1-weighted images were independently significant morphologic findings (p < 0.05) for differentiating the two groups. All observers achieved a higher diagnostic accuracy in session 2 (97% and 98%) than session 1 (92% and 89%) with statistical significance in observer 2 (p < 0.05). All observers had significantly higher sensitivities (95%) and negative predictive values (NPVs) (98%) in session 2 than in session 1 (sensitivity, 74% in two observers; NPV, 89% and 88%) (p < 0.05).
conclusionWith the size change, an ill-defined margin and isointensity on T1-weighted images are the most useful findings for differentiating FEI from hepatic metastasis on gadoxetic acid-enhanced 3.0T MRI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.