ArticleLa Radiologia medica2019
Misleading findings of liver-specific MR contrast agent for radiological diagnosis of cysto-biliary communication in hydatid cysts.
Article in La Radiologia medica, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic evaluation and ablation treatments assessment in hepatocellular carcinoma.Infectious agents and cancer · 2021Review
- Complications of hepatic echinococcosis: multimodality imaging approach.Insights into imaging · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the effectiveness of gadoxetic acid-enhanced magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (CE-MRCP) and T2-weighted half-Fourier acquisition single-shot turbo spin-echo (T2W HASTE) sequences for diagnosis of cysto-biliary communication in hydatid cysts compared to surgical results.
methodsPreoperative abdominal magnetic resonance imaging examinations of patients who underwent surgery for hepatic hydatid cysts were reviewed by two radiologists retrospectively. A total of 45 patients with hydatid cysts were included. Of 45, 27 also had CE-MRCPs. T2W HASTE sequences and CE-MRCPs were investigated separately for cysto-biliary communication. The relationship between radiological and surgical results was analyzed. The interobserver agreement was evaluated.
resultsOf 45 hydatid cysts, there were surgically proven 21 cysts without biliary communications and 24 cysts with biliary communications. All cysts with biliary communications were shown on T2W HASTE sequences. There was no leakage of gadoxetic acid into these cysts (n = 24). Sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value (PPV), and accuracy of diagnosis of cyst with biliary communication on T2W HASTE sequences was 100%, 63.64%, 100%, 66.67%, and 78.95%, respectively. Specificity (77.78%), PPV (87.50%), and accuracy (91.30%) were increased in ≥ 10 cm cysts. There was almost perfect interobserver agreement (K = 0.81-1.00).
conclusionLeakage of gadoxetic acid inside the cyst indicates biliary communication. However, the lack of leakage does not rule out cysto-biliary communication. When biliary communication is clearly shown on T2W HASTE sequences, it should be reported as cysto-biliary communication even if there is no leakage of gadoxetic acid into the cyst on CE-MRCP.
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.