ArticleEuropean journal of radiology open2020
Comparative analysis of three-dimensional volume rendering and maximum intensity projection for preoperative planning in liver cancer.
Article in European journal of radiology open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recognizing an IVC leiomyosarcoma: CT imaging hallmarks and the utility of 3D rendering.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
- The SmARTR pipeline: A modular workflow for the cinematic rendering of 3D scientific imaging data.iScience · 2024Article
- Streamlining neuroradiology workflow with AI for improved cerebrovascular structure monitoring.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Procedural Software Toolkit in the Armamentarium of Interventional Therapies: A Review of Additive Usefulness and Current Evidence.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Anatomical Description of Loggerhead Turtle (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Three-dimensional imaging is a useful tool to evaluate liver structure and surrounding vessels for preoperative planning. In this study, we compared two methods of visualizing vascular maps on computed tomography including maximum intensity projection (MIP) and 3D volume rendered (VR) imaging. We compiled important imaging components of pre-surgical planning, and developed criteria for comparison. The imaging techniques were compared based on colorization, volume quantification, rotation, vessel delineation, small vessel clarity, and segmental liver isolation. MIP had more overall limitations due to reduced differentiation of superimposed structures, motion artifact, and interference from calcifications. We determined that because 3D quantitative volume rendered imaging can provide more detail and perspective than MIP imaging, it may be more useful in preoperative planning for patients with liver malignancy. Advanced 3D imaging is a useful tool that can have profound clinical implications on cancer detection and surgical planning.
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.