ArticleEuropean radiology2022
LI-RADS ancillary features favoring benignity: is there a role in LR-5 observations?
Article in European radiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- 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
- Benign and malignant focal liver lesions displaying rim arterial phase hyperenhancement on CT and MRI.Insights into imaging · 2024Review
- Optimizing LI-RADS: ancillary features screened from LR-3/4 categories can improve the diagnosis of HCC on MRI.BMC gastroenterology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System algorithm allows category downgrade in the presence of ancillary features (AFs) favoring benignity, even in observations categorized as LR-5. This study aims to assess the role of AFs favoring benignity in LR-5 observations and their impact on category downgrade.
methodsThis study included high-risk patients with at least one LR-5 observation imaged with gadoxetate disodium MRI. Three readers with different experience levels independently evaluated the presence of AFs favoring malignancy (not hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in particular and HCC in particular) and AFs favoring benignity. Category downgrade was considered possible in the presence of ≥ 1 AF favoring benignity and no AF favoring malignancy. Correlation between observations size and number of AFs was assessed using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. Cohen's kappa (k) test was used to assess inter-reader agreement.
resultsThe final study cohort included 162 LR-5 (mean size: 23 ± 16 mm) in 119 patients. AFs favoring benignity were reported in 9 (5.6%), 20 (12.3%), and 10 (6.2%) LR-5 observations by reader 1, reader 2, and reader 3, respectively. Hepatobiliary phase isointensity was observed in 6 (3.7%), 2 (1.2%), and 7 (4.3%) observations, respectively. Category downgrade was considered possible in only one (0.6%) observation by reader 1 and reader 3. There was a significant correlation between observation size and number of AFs favoring malignancy (p < 0.001), not HCC in particular (p ≤ 0.010), and favoring HCC in particular (p < 0.001). Inter-reader agreement of AFs favoring benignity was poor to moderate (k range: - 0.01, 0.43).
conclusionsAFs favoring benignity are not uncommon in LR-5 observations, but category downgrade is exceptional. KEY POINTS: • Ancillary features favoring benignity are encountered in 5.6-12.3% of observations categorized as LR-5. • Category downgrade of LR-5 observations is very rare (0.6% of observations) in the presence of AFs favoring benignity due to the high prevalence (98-99%) of ancillary features favoring malignancy in LR-5 observations. • The inter-reader agreement of ancillary features favoring benignity is poor to moderate (k range: - 0.01, 0.43) in readers with different levels of experience.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34545444What 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.