Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29922928›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2019

LI-RADS v2014 categorization of hepatocellular carcinoma: Intraindividual comparison between gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced MRI and gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI.

Ji Soo Song, Eun Jung Choi, Seung Bae Hwang, Hong Pil Hwang, HyeMi Choi

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European radiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Ji Soo SongDepartment of Radiology, Chonbuk National University Medical School and Hospital, 20 Geonji-ro, Deokjin-gu, Jeonju, Chonbuk, 54907, South Korea. pichgo@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4264-5320
Eun Jung ChoiDepartment of Radiology, Chonbuk National University Medical School and Hospital, 20 Geonji-ro, Deokjin-gu, Jeonju, Chonbuk, 54907, South Korea.
Seung Bae HwangDepartment of Radiology, Chonbuk National University Medical School and Hospital, 20 Geonji-ro, Deokjin-gu, Jeonju, Chonbuk, 54907, South Korea.
Hong Pil HwangDepartment of Surgery, Chonbuk National University Medical School, Jeonju, South Korea.
HyeMi ChoiDepartment of Statistics, Research Institute of Applied Statistics, Chonbuk National University, Jeonju, South Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo use Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) categorization and features of hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) to intraindividually compare gadopentetate dimeglumine-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (Gd-DTPA-MRI) and gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI (Gd-EOB-MRI), before and after applying modified major features.

methodsOf 77 HCCs in 64 patients analysed, 17 HCCs were confirmed histopathologically and 46 patients had cirrhosis. Gd-EOB-MRI and Gd-DTPA-MRI were evaluated for the presence of major and ancillary features by two radiologists. LI-RADS categorization was done for Gd-DTPA-MRI (LI-RADS-DTPA) and for Gd-EOB-MRI before and after applying modified major features (hepatobiliary phase [HBP] hypointensity as an additional major feature, LI-RADS-EOBm1; HBP hypointense rim as capsule appearance, LI-RADS-EOBm2; and transitional phase [TP] hypointensity as washout appearance, LI-RADS-EOBm3). Sensitivities of LR-5 categorization for the diagnosis of HCC were compared.

resultsWashout (p=0.012) and capsule appearance (p<0.001) were less frequently observed on Gd-EOB-MRI. Sensitivity for LR-5 categorization was significantly higher with LI-RADS-DTPA compared with LI-RADS-EOB (p=0.001) and LI-RADS-EOBm2 (p=0.004), while sensitivity for LR-5 categorization with LI-RADS-EOBm1 (p=0.210) and LI-RADS-EOBm3 (p=0.727) was comparable.

conclusionModifying LI-RADS for use with Gd-EOB-MRI, such as applying HBP hypointensity as an additional major feature or using TP hypointensity as washout appearance, can improve the sensitivity for the detection of HCC. KEY POINTS: • Adding HBP hypointensity as additional major feature improved sensitivity of LR-5 categorization. • Adding TP hypointensity as modified washout appearance improved sensitivity of LR-5 categorization. • Sensitivities for LR-5 classification were comparable between LI-RADS-DTPA, LI-RADS-EOBm1, and LI-RADS-EOBm3.

Indexed as

AdultAgedCarcinoma, HepatocellularContrast MediaFemaleGadolinium DTPAHumansLiver NeoplasmsMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsContrast MediaGadolinium DTPAgadolinium ethoxybenzyl DTPADiagnosisGadopentetate dimeglumineHepatocellular carcinomaLiverMagnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.