ArticleRadiology and oncology2020
Major and ancillary features according to LI-RADS in the assessment of combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma.
Article in Radiology and oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- A modified Rim APHE criterion to improve LI-RADS diagnostic performance for primary liver malignancies.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Diagnostic performance of liver imaging reporting and data system ancillary features for hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and evidence synthesis.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
- Review
- Liver transplantation for combined hepatocellular cholangiocarcinoma: Current evidence, selection criteria, and therapeutic controversies.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2025Review
- Prognostic Impact of CCA Components in Combined Hepatocellular Carcinoma-Cholangiocarcinoma.Journal of hepatocellular carcinoma · 2024Article
- [Advances in imaging diagnosis of mixed-type liver cancer].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2023Review
- Risk Assessment and Cholangiocarcinoma: Diagnostic Management and Artificial Intelligence.Biology · 2023Review
- Radiomics in medical imaging: pitfalls and challenges in clinical management.Japanese journal of radiology · 2022Review
- Combined Hepatocellular-Cholangiocarcinoma: An Update on Pathology and Diagnostic Approach.Biomedicines · 2022Review
- A Narrative Review on LI-RADS Algorithm in Liver Tumors: Prospects and Pitfalls.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Diffusion weighted imaging and diffusion kurtosis imaging in abdominal oncological setting: why and when.Infectious agents and cancer · 2022Review
- Combined Hepatocellular-Cholangiocarcinoma: What the Multidisciplinary Team Should Know.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Conventional, functional and radiomics assessment for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.Infectious agents and cancer · 2022Article
- An update on radiomics techniques in primary liver cancers.Infectious agents and cancer · 2022Article
- Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma and its differential diagnosis at MRI: how radiologist should assess MR features.La Radiologia medica · 2021Article
- Diagnostic evaluation and ablation treatments assessment in hepatocellular carcinoma.Infectious agents and cancer · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background The aim of the study was to investigate the performance of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) v2018 for combined hepatocellular-cholangiocarcinoma (cHCC-CCA) identifying the features that allow an accurate characterization. Patients and methods Sixty-two patients (median age, 63 years; range, 38-80 years), with pre-surgical biopsy diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) that underwent hepatic resection, comprised our retrospective study. All patients were subject to multidetector computed tomography (MDCT); 23 patients underwent to magnetic resonance (MR) study. The radiologist reported the presence of the HCC by using LIRADS v2018 assessing major and ancillary features. Results Final histological diagnosis was HCC for 51 patients and cHCC-CCA for 11 patients. The median nodule size was 46.0 mm (range 10-190 mm). For cHCC-CCA the median size was 33.5 mm (range 20-80 mm), for true HCC the median size was 47.5 mm (range 10-190 mm). According to LIRADS categories: 54 (87.1%) nodules as defined as LR-5, 1 (1.6%) as LR-3, and 7 (11.3%) as LR-M. Thirty-nine nodules (63%) showed hyper-enhancement in arterial phase; among them 4 were cHCC-CCA (36.4% of cHCC-CCA) and 35 (68.6%) true HCC. Forty-three nodules (69.3%) showed washout appearance; 6 cHCC-CCAs (54.5% of cHCC-CCA) and 37 true HCC (72.5%) had this feature. Only two cHCC-CCA patients (18.2% of cHCC-CCA) showed capsule appearance. Five cHCC-CCA (71.4% of cHCC-CCA) showed hyperintensity on T2-W sequences while two (28.6%) showed inhomogeneous signal in T2-W. All cHCC-CCA showed restricted diffusion. Seven cHCC-CCA patients showed a progressive contrast enhancement and satellite nodules. Conclusions The presence of satellite nodules, hyperintense signal on T2-W, restricted diffusion, the absence of capsule appearance in nodule that shows peripheral and progressive contrast enhancement are suggestive features of cHCC-CCA.
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.