Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31001679›Full record

ArticleEuropean radiology2019

Inter- and intra-reader agreement for gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI parameter readings in patients with chronic liver diseases.

Lucian Beer, Mattias Mandorfer, Nina Bastati, Sarah Poetter-Lang, Dietmar Tamandl, Dilyana Plamenova Stoyanova, Michael Christoph Elmer, Georg Semmler, Benedikt Simbrunner, Jacqueline C Hodge and 3 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
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 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Quantitative Assessment of Liver Function Using the Liver Enhancement Ratio on Gadoxetic Acid-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Chronic Liver Disease.The Turkish journal of gastroenterology : the official journal of Turkish Society of Gastroenterology · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  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

13 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Lucian BeerDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Imaging-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Mattias MandorferDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine III, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Nina BastatiDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Imaging-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Sarah Poetter-LangDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Imaging-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Dietmar TamandlDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Imaging-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Dilyana Plamenova StoyanovaDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Imaging-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Michael Christoph ElmerDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Imaging-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Georg SemmlerDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine III, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Benedikt SimbrunnerDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine III, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Jacqueline C HodgeDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Imaging-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Claude B SirlinLiver Imaging Group, Department of Radiology, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, 92093, USA.
Thomas ReibergerDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Department of Medicine III, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Ahmed Ba-SsalamahDepartment of Biomedical Imaging and Imaging-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria. ahmed.ba-ssalamah@meduniwien.ac.at.
Medical University of Vienna · ATUniversity of California, San Diego · US

Funding

Oesterreichische Nationalbank 16886
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo examine inter- and intra-observer agreement for four simple hepatobiliary phase (HBP)-based scores on gadoxetic acid (GA)-enhanced MRI and their correlation with liver function in patients with mixed chronic liver disease (CLD).

methodsThis single-center, retrospective study included 287 patients (62% male, 38% female, mean age 53.5 ± 13.7 years) with mixed CLD (20.9% hepatitis C, 19.2% alcoholic liver disease, 8% hepatitis B) who underwent GA-enhanced MRI of the liver for clinical care between 2010 and 2015. Relative liver enhancement (RLE), contrast uptake index (CUI), hepatic uptake index (HUI), and liver-to-spleen contrast index (LSI) were calculated by two radiologists independently using unenhanced and GA-enhanced HPB (obtained 20 min after GA administration) images; 50 patients selected at random were reviewed twice by one reader to assess intra-observer reliability. Agreement was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The albumin-bilirubin (ALBI) score, the model of end-stage liver disease (MELD), and the Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) score were calculated as standards of reference for hepatic function.

resultsIntra-observer ICCs ranged from 0.814 (0.668-0.896) for CUI to 0.969 (0.945-0.983) for RLE. Inter-observer ICCs ranged from 0.777 (0.605-0.874) for HUI to 0.979 (0.963-0.988) for RLE. All HBP-based scores correlated significantly (all p < 0.001) with the ALBI, MELD, and CTP scores and were able to discriminate patients with a MELD score ≥ 15 versus ≤ 14, with area under the curve values ranging from 0.760 for RLE to 0.782 for HUI.

conclusionGA-enhanced, MRI-derived, HBP-based parameters showed excellent inter- and intra-observer agreement. All HBP-based parameters correlated with clinical and laboratory scores of hepatic dysfunction, with no significant differences between each other. KEY POINTS: • Radiological parameters that quantify the hepatic uptake of gadoxetic acid are highly reproducible. • These parameters can be used interchangeably because they correlate with each other and with scores of hepatic dysfunction. • Assessment of these parameters may be helpful in monitoring disease progression.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChronic DiseaseContrast MediaFemaleGadolinium DTPAHumansLiver DiseasesMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesROC CurveContrast MediaGadolinium DTPAgadolinium ethoxybenzyl DTPAGadoxetic acidLiverLiver diseasesLiver function testsMagnetic resonance imaging

Identifiers

PMID31001679
PMCPMC6828941
OpenAlexW2936182851

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.