ArticleOncology letters2019
Value of ultrasound combined with MRI in the diagnosis of primary and recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma.
Article in Oncology letters, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Application of Nanomaterials in the Detection of Liver Cancer Biomarkers.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- Practical Considerations in Abdominal MRI: Sequences, Patient Preparation, and Clinical Applications.Methods and protocols · 2025Article
- Article
- Artificial Intelligence Algorithm in Classification and Recognition of Primary Hepatic Carcinoma Images under Magnetic Resonance Imaging.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2022Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ultrasound (US) combined with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the diagnosis of primary hepatocellular carcinoma (PHCC) and recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma (RHCC) were compared. The clinical data of 329 patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) admitted to Qingdao Women and Children's Hospital from June 2015 to December 2017 were collected. One hundred and sixty patients with PHCC were regarded as the PHCC group, and the other 169 patients with RHCC were regarded as the RHCC group. US and MRI were used in the imaging diagnosis of both groups and the results of US combined with MRI, US, and MRI alone were compared. The lesion size in the PHCC group was significantly higher than that in the RHCC group (P<0.05). The MRI fast-in and fast-out rates of the two groups were significantly higher than those of the other three methods (P<0.05). The coincidence rate of MRI in the two groups was higher than that of computed tomography (CT), US, and US combined with MRI (P<0.05). The coincidence rates of CT, US, MRI, and US combined with MRI in PHCC group were significantly higher than those in RHCC group. In PHCC group, MRI was superior to the other methods in the detection of micro HCC (P<0.05). In RHCC group, MRI was significantly better than US in the detection of micro HCC (P<0.05). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of MRI were significantly better than the other three methods (P<0.05). MRI alone has the best diagnostic efficacy for micro HCC-type lesions. The diagnostic efficacy of MRI, US, CT, and US combined with MRI in PHCC was better than those in RHCC. In addition to imaging examination, the diagnosis of RHCC should be combined with other indicators for comprehensive diagnosis.
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.