ArticleBMC medical imaging2021
HBP-enhancing hepatocellular adenomas and how to discriminate them from FNH in Gd-EOB MRI.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hepatic Adenoma Subtypes on Hepatobiliary Phase of Gadoxetic Acid-Enhanced MRI: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.AJR. American journal of roentgenology · 2023Pooled it
- Classification of liver lesions based on temporal changes in hepatobiliary phase contrast on magnetic resonance imaging: a preliminary study.Radiological physics and technology · 2025Article
- Qualitative and quantitative assessment of gadoxetic acid MRI in distinguishing atypical focal nodular hyperplasia from hepatocellular adenoma subtypes.European radiology · 2025Article
- Lesions hyper- to isointense to surrounding liver in the hepatobiliary phase of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI.European radiology · 2024Article
- Intrahepatic Mass-Forming Cholangiocarcinoma: Is There Additional Prognostic Value in Using Gd-EOB Enhanced MRI?Cancers · 2024Article
- A rare case of MRI of myxoid hepatocellular adenoma with gadoxetic acid uptake.BJR case reports · 2023Article
- Differentiation of focal nodular hyperplasia and hepatocellular adenoma using qualitative and quantitative imaging features and classification and regression tree analysis.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2023Article
- Review
- Imaging features of β-catenin-activated hepatocellular adenoma with weak β-catenin activation: A rare case report.Acta radiologica open · 2022Article
- Article
- Case Report: Rare Acute Abdomen: Focal Nodular Hyperplasia With Spontaneous Rupture.Frontiers in oncology · 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
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRecent studies provide evidence that hepatocellular adenomas (HCAs) frequently take up gadoxetic acid (Gd-EOB) during the hepatobiliary phase (HBP). The purpose of our study was to investigate how to differentiate between Gd-EOB-enhancing HCAs and focal nodular hyperplasias (FNHs). We therefore retrospectively included 40 HCAs classified as HBP Gd-EOB-enhancing lesions from a sample of 100 histopathologically proven HCAs in 65 patients. These enhancing HCAs were matched retrospectively with 28 FNH lesions (standard of reference: surgical resection). Two readers (experienced abdominal radiologists blinded to clinical data) reviewed the images evaluating morphologic features and subjectively scoring Gd-EOB uptake (25-50%, 50-75% and 75-100%) for each lesion. Quantitative lesion-to-liver enhancement was measured in arterial, portal venous (PV), transitional and HBP. Additionally, multivariate regression analyses were performed.
resultsSubjective scoring of intralesional Gd-EOB uptake showed the highest discriminatory accuracies (AUC: 0.848 (R#1); 0.920 (R#2)-p < 0.001) with significantly higher uptake scores assigned to FNHs (Cut-off: 75%-100%). Typical lobulation and presence of a central scar in FNH achieved an accuracy of 0.750 or higher in at least one reader (lobulation-AUC: 0.809 (R#1); 0.736 (R#2); central scar-AUC: 0.595 (R#1); 0.784 (R#2)). The multivariate regression emphasized the discriminatory power of the Gd-EOB scoring (p = 0.001/OR:22.15 (R#1) and p < 0.001/OR:99.12 (R#2). The lesion-to-liver ratio differed significantly between FNH and HCA in the PV phase and HBP (PV: 132.9 (FNH) and 110.2 (HCA), p = 0.048 and HBP: 110.3 (FNH) and 39.2 (HCA), p < 0.001)), while the difference was not significant in arterial and transitional contrast phases (p > 0.05).
conclusionEven in HBP-enhancing HCA, characterization of Gd-EOB uptake was found to provide the strongest discriminatory power in differentiating HCA from FNH. Furthermore, a lobulated appearance and a central scar are more frequently seen in FNH than in HCA.
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.