ReviewDer Radiologe2022
[Small hepatocellular carcinoma : Diagnostics according to guidelines and established in the clinical setting].
Review in Der Radiologe, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fluorescence lifetime imaging microscopy approach reveals quantitative signatures for hepatocellular carcinoma diagnosis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Identification of a cuproptosis and copper metabolism gene-related lncRNAs prognostic signature associated with clinical and immunological characteristics of hepatocellular carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
clinical/methodical issueThe diagnosis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)-especially the characterization of small lesions <2 cm-continues to be a radiological challenge. STANDARD RADIOLOGICAL
methodsIn the current S3 guideline on diagnosis and therapy of HCC, contrast-enhanced imaging examinations, such as contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS), computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), are still the diagnostic standard. METHODOLOGICAL INNOVATIONS: HCC in the cirrhotic liver should be diagnosed by its typical contrast-enhanced pattern in the MRI. In addition, the use of quality assurance instruments such as LI-RADS (Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System) contributes to the desired consistency of findings, even with small ambiguous findings. PERFORMANCE: Many studies have shown that the LI-RADS classification reflects the likelihood of HCC and other malignant liver lesions. ACHIEVEMENTS: Guidelines and quality assurance instruments contribute to a more precise diagnosis in patients with suspected HCC. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: A guideline-compliant diagnostic algorithm and the LI-RADS should be used across the board for accurate HCC diagnostics.
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.