Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21994860›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of hepatology2011

Gadoxetate Acid-Enhanced MR Imaging for HCC: A Review for Clinicians.

Jendana Chanyaputhipong, Su-Chong Albert Low, Pierce K H Chow

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of hepatology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Targeted TACS applied materials & interfaces · 2019
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. [Radiological diagnosis of primary hepatic malignancy].Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2013
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jendana ChanyaputhipongDepartment of General Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, 169608, Singapore.
Su-Chong Albert Low
Pierce K H Chow
Singapore General Hospital · SGDuke-NUS Medical School · SG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is increasingly being detected at an earlier stage, owing to the screening programs and regular imaging follow-up in high-risk populations. Small HCCs still pose diagnostic challenges on imaging due to decreased sensitivity and increased frequency of atypical features. Differentiating early HCC from premalignant or benign nodules is important as management differs and has implications on both the quality of life and the overall survival for the patients. Gadoxetate acid (Gd-EOB-DTPA, Primovist(®), Bayer Schering Pharma) is a relatively new, safe and well-tolerated liver-specific contrast agent for magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the liver that has combined perfusion- and hepatocyte-specific properties, allowing for the acquisition of both dynamic and hepatobiliary phase images. Its high biliary uptake and excretion improves lesion detection and characterization by increasing liver-to-lesion conspicuity in the added hepatobiliary phase imaging. To date, gadoxetate acid-enhanced MRI has been mostly shown to be superior to unenhanced MRI, computed tomography, and other types of contrast agents in the detection and characterization of liver lesions. This review article focuses on the evolving role of gadoxetate acid in the characterization of HCC, differentiating it from other mimickers of HCC.

Identifiers

PMID21994860
PMCPMC3170825
OpenAlexW1991749949

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.