ArticleThe British journal of radiology2020
Diagnostic accuracy of signal loss in in-phase gradient-echo images for differentiation between small renal cell carcinoma and lipid-poor angiomyolipomas.
Article in The British journal of radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the diagnostic accuracy of signal loss on in-phase (IP) gradient-echo (GRE) images for differentiation between renal cell carcinomas (RCCs) and lipid-poor angiomyolipomas (lpAMLs).
methodsWe retrospectively searched our institutional database for histologically proven small RCCs (<5.0 cm) and AMLs without visible macroscopic fat (lpAMLs). Two experienced radiologists assessed MRIs qualitatively, to depict signal loss foci on IP GRE images. A third radiologist drew regions of interest (ROIs) on the same lesions, on IP and out-of-phase (OP) images to calculate the ratio of signal loss. Diagnostic accuracy parameters were calculated for both techniques and the inter-reader agreement for the qualitative analysis was evaluated using the κ test.
results15 (38.4%) RCCs lost their signal on IP images, with a sensitivity of 38.5% (95% CI = 23.4-55.4), a specificity of 100% (71.1-100), a positive predictive value (PPV) of 100% (73.4-100), a negative predictive value (NPV) of 31.4% (26.3-37.0), and an overall accuracy of 52% (37.4-66.3%). In terms of the quantitative analysis, the signal intensity index (SII= [(SI
conclusionSignal loss in "IP" images, assessed subjectively, was highly specific for distinction between RCCs and lpAMLs, although with low sensitivity. The findings can be used to improve the preoperative diagnostic accuracy of MRI for renal masses. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Signal loss on "IP" GRE images is a reliable sign for differentiation between RCC and lpAMLs.
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.