Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27708485›Full record

ArticleActa informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH2016

DWI/ADC in Differentiation of Benign from Malignant Focal Liver Lesion.

Elma Jahic, Amela Sofic, Azra Husic Selimovic

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Simultaneous liver TMagnetic resonance in medicine · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
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.

Elma JahicClinic of Radiology, Clinical Center of Sarajevo University, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Amela SoficClinic of Radiology, Clinical Center of Sarajevo University, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Azra Husic SelimovicInstitute of Gastroenterology, Clinical Center of Sarajevo University, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

MATERIAL AND

methodsThe study was of prospective-retrospective character. It was carried out at the AKH in Vienna (Austria), where 100 patients with focal liver lesions were included in the study. All patients underwent the routine MR sequences on appliances 1,5 and 3T (Siemens, Germany): T1, T2, HASTE, VIBE, and a DWI with three b values (b 50, b 300 b 600 s / mm

resultsOn the basis of matching the PH finding statistically we get DWI accuracy of 96.8% for the assessment of liver lesions. The average numerical value of ADC in benign hepatic lesions (FNH, Hemangiomas) in our study amounted to 1.88 (1.326 to 2.48) x10

conclusionMeasuring ADC values with DWI as an additional MRI tool can help in oncological practice by distinguishing normal liver parenchyma from focal lesions, and in differentiating benign from malignant liver lesions, particularly in cases where administration of contrast is not possible.

Indexed as

apparent diffusion coefficientdiffusion weighted imagingfocal liver lesions

Identifiers

PMID27708485
PMCPMC5037977

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.