ArticleActa radiologica open2021
Comparison of the effectiveness of celiac versus common hepatic artery injection for the detection of hepatocellular carcinoma and of the feeding artery on cone-beam computed tomographs obtained during hepatic angiography.
Article in Acta radiologica open, 2021. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) has been widely used during transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for hepatocellular carcinoma. PURPOSE: To evaluate the sensitivity of CBCT for the detection of hepatocellular carcinomas and the tumor feeders by comparing celiac artery (CA) and common hepatic artery (CHA) injection. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe retrospectively enrolled 30 patients (52 hepatocellular carcinoma lesions) who had undergone CBCT-assisted transcatheter arterial chemoembolization. In 17 procedures (28 hepatocellular carcinomas) we acquired CBCT scans using CA injections (CBCT-CA) and in 18 (24 hepatocellular carcinomas) we used CHA injections (CBCT-CHA). Of the 30 patients, 5 underwent CBCT-CA and CBCT-CHA at different transcatheter arterial chemoembolization procedures. We performed inter-group comparisons of the detectability of hepatocellular carcinoma, the feeding artery, the intrahepatic artery branch order, and the tumor-to-liver contrast.
resultsCBCT-CA detected all 28 hepatocellular carcinomas and 27 of their feeders (96.4%); CBCT-CHA identified 22 of 24 hepatocellular carcinomas (91.7%) and 21 of their feeders (95.5%). There was no significant inter-group difference in the detectability of hepatocellular carcinoma lesions (p = 0.21) or feeding arteries (p = 0.69). CBCT-CHA was superior for the assessment of the tumor-to-liver contrast and the intrahepatic artery branch order (both: p < 0.01).
conclusionCBCT-CA and CBCT-CHA were equally useful for the detection of hepatocellular carcinoma and of the feeding artery, although CBCT-CHA yields better visualization of hepatocellular carcinoma and the hepatic artery. Thus CA injection seems sufficient for lesion and vessel detection when the insertion of an angiographic catheter into the CHA is difficult.
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.