ArticleWorld journal of gastroenterology2014
Contrast-enhanced ultrasound: Improving the preoperative staging of hepatocellular carcinoma and guiding individual treatment.
Article in World journal of gastroenterology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- The comparison of contrast-enhanced ultrasound and gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI LI-RADS for nodules ≤2 cm in patients at high risk for HCC: a prospective study.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Article
- Protocol of Kupffer phase whole liver scan for metastases: A single-center prospective study.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Current role of intraoperative ultrasonography in hepatectomy.Surgery today · 2021Review
- Major and ancillary features according to LI-RADS in the assessment of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma.Radiology and oncology · 2020Article
- Contrast-enhanced ultrasound in differentiating malignant from benign portal vein thrombosis in hepatocellular carcinoma.World journal of gastroenterology · 2015Review
- Diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for detecting bland thrombus from inferior vena cava tumor thrombus in patients with renal cell carcinoma.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo investigate the clinical role of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) combined with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) or magnetic resonance imaging to improve the preoperative staging of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and guide surgical decision-making.
methodsSixty-nine patients who underwent liver resection for HCC in our center were enrolled prospectively in the study. CEUS and CE-CT/MRI were performed before surgery. Intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) was carried out after liver mobilization. Lesions depicted by each imaging modality were counted and mapped. To investigate the impact of tumor size on the study, we divided the patients into two groups, the "Smaller group"(S-group, ≤ 5 cm in diameter) and the "Larger-group" (L-group, > 5 cm in diameter). The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of CE-CT/MRI, CEUS, IOUS, CEUS+CE-CT/MRI and the tumor node metastasis staging of tumors were calculated and compared. Changes in the surgical strategy as a result of CEUS and IOUS were analyzed.
resultsOne hundred and twenty-seven nodules, comprising 94 HCCs confirmed by histopathology and 33 benign lesions confirmed by histopathology and follow-up, were identified in 69 patients. The overall diagnostic sensitivity rates of CE-CT/MRI, CEUS, IOUS and CEUS+ CE-CT/MRI were 78.7%, 89.4%, 89.4% and 89.4%, respectively. There was a significant difference between CEUS + CE-CT/MRI and CE-CT/MRI (P = 0.046). Combining CEUS with CT or MRI increased, the diagnostic specificity compared with CT/MRI, CEUS and IOUS, and this difference was statistically significant (100%, 72.7%, 97.0%, and 69.7%, P = 0.004, P = 0.002, P = 0.002, respectively). The diagnostic accuracy was significantly higher for CEUS + CT/MRI compared with CT/MRI (92.1% vs 77.2%, P = 0.001). The TNM staging of tumors based on CEUS + CE-CT/MRI approximated to the final pathological TNM staging (P = 0.977). There was a significant difference in the accuracy of TNM staging when comparing CEUS + CE-CT/MRI with CE-CT/MRI (P = 0.002). Before surgery, strategies were changed in 15.9% (11/69) of patients as a result of CEUS. Finally, only 5.7% (4/69) of surgical strategies were changed because of IOUS findings. In the S-group, CEUS revealed 12 false positive lesions, including seven false positive lesions that were diagnosed by preoperative imaging examinations and five by IOUS. In contrast, in the L-group, IUOS revealed eight new malignant lesions; six of these lesions were true HCCs that were also identified by preoperative CEUS.
conclusionCEUS combined with CT or MRI improves the accuracy of preoperative staging for hepatocellular carcinoma and may help to guide individualized treatment for patients with HCC. CEUS may better identify non-malignant lesions in patients with small tumors and discover new malignant lesions in patients with large tumors.
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.