SynthesisThe British journal of radiology2021
Diagnostic accuracy of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value in differentiating malignant from benign solid liver lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in The British journal of radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Role of ADC in differentiating hepatocellular adenoma vs. hepatocellular carcinoma and metastatic liver lesions: systematic review and meta-analysis.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Pooled it
- Review
- Development and validation of a nomogram combined pre-operative quantitative MR parameters for the prediction of pathological WHO/ISUP grade in clear cell renal cell carcinoma.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Comparison of Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Values on Diffusion-Weighted MRI for Differentiating Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Feature-guided deep learning reduces signal loss and increases lesion CNR in diffusion-weighted imaging of the liver.Zeitschrift fur medizinische Physik · 2024Article
- The unintended consequences of artificial intelligence in paediatric radiology.Pediatric radiology · 2024Article
- Potential diagnostic value of high b-value computed diffusion-weighted imaging in hepatocellular carcinoma.Clinical and experimental hepatology · 2024Article
- Liver metastases: The role of magnetic resonance imaging.World journal of gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Correlation betweenHeliyon · 2023Article
- Differentiating nasopharyngeal carcinoma from lymphoma in the head and neck region using the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) value: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Polish journal of radiology · 2023Review
- Standardised lesion segmentation for imaging biomarker quantitation: a consensus recommendation from ESR and EORTC.Insights into imaging · 2022Article
- Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Clinical Potential and Applications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Predictive Value of MRI with Serum Lectin-Reactive Alpha-Fetoprotein for Liver Cancer Recurrence after Percutaneous Radiofrequency Ablation.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2022Article
- Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography to Evaluate Improvement Effect of FXR Regulating Bile Acid on Hepatocellular Carcinoma with Obstructive Jaundice.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWe undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic performance of mean apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values derived by diffusion-weighted (DW)-MRI in the characterization of solid benign and malignant liver lesions, and to assess their value in discriminating these lesions in daily routine practice.
methodsA systematic review of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted to retrieve studies that used ADC values for differentiating solid benign/dysplastic nodules and malignant liver lesions. A bivariate random-effects model with pooled sensitivity and specificity values with 95% CI (confidence interval) was used. This meta-analysis was performed on the per-lesion basis. Summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) plot and area under curve (AUC) were created.
resultsA total of 14 original articles were retrieved. The combined (95% CI) sensitivity and specificity of mean ADC values for differentiating solid benign from malignant lesions were 78% (67-86%) and 74% (64-81%), respectively. The pooled (95% CI) positive and negative LRs were respectively 3 (2.3-3.8) and 0.3 (0.21-0.43). The DOR (95% CI) was 10 (7-15). The AUC (95% CI) of the SROC plot was 82% (78-85%). Reporting bias was negligible (
conclusionADC measurement independently may not be an optimal diagnostic imaging method for differentiating solid malignant from solid benign hepatic lesions. The meta-analysis showed that ADC measurement had moderate diagnostic accuracy for characterizing solid liver lesions. Further prospective and comparative studies with pre-specified ADC thresholds could be performed to investigate the best MRI protocol and ADC threshold for characterizing solid liver lesions. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: ADC measurement by DW-MRI does not have a good diagnostic performance to differentiate solid malignant from solid benign lesions. Therefore, we suggest not using ADC values in clinical practice to evaluate solid liver lesions.
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.