Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35284256›Full record

ArticleQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery2022

Comparison of superb microvascular imaging (SMI) quantified with ImageJ to quantified contrast-enhanced ultrasound (qCEUS) in liver metastases-a pilot study.

Wolfgang Kratzer, Melanie Güthle, Felix Dobler, Thomas Seufferlein, Tilmann Graeter, Julian Schmidberger, Thomas Fe Barth, Jochen Klaus

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Wolfgang Kratzer *Department of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Melanie Güthle *Department of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Felix DoblerDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Thomas SeufferleinDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Tilmann GraeterDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Julian SchmidbergerDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Thomas Fe BarthInstitute of Pathology, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Jochen KlausDepartment of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
University Hospital Ulm · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The aim of the study was to compare methods for the assessment of vascularisation of liver metastases (LM) between superb microvascular imaging (SMI), contrast-enhanced ultrasound, and microvascular density (MVD). Methods: SMI results were quantified as the vascularisation quotient (VQ), based on a grey-scale analysis with ImageJ image software. Those results were compared to contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) values, calculated with VueBox Results: This study included 13 patients with LM. The VQ showed a strong correlation with the quantified parameters of contrast-enhanced ultrasound. The parameters of quantified contrast-enhanced ultrasound compared with quantified SMI showed the following statistical correlations: peak enhancement (PE), in arbitrary unit (a.u.) (r=0.72104, P=0.0054), PE in Decibel (dB) (r=0.65918, P=0.00141), Wash-in- Area Under the Curve (WiAUC) in a.u. (r=0.63604, P=0.00194), Wash-in Perfusion-Index (WiPI) in a.u. (r=0.73337, P=0.0043), Wash-in Perfusion-Index (WiPI) in dB (r=0.65642, P=0.0194), Wash-in-Rate (WiR) in a.u. (r=0.7304, P=0.0036) and Wash-in-Rate (WiR) in dB (r=0.82897, P=0.0005). Conclusions: Comparison of the two methods, SMI and contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS), for quantitative assessment of vascularisation of LM showed good correlation. The contrast-independent Doppler technique SMI can qualitatively assess the vascularisation of LM.

Indexed as

computer-assisted image analysescontrast-enhanced ultrasoundDoppler ultrasoundLivermetastasis

Identifiers

PMID35284256
PMCPMC8899953
OpenAlexW4206504491

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.