SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2022
Risk Stratification and Distribution of Hepatocellular Carcinomas in CEUS and CT/MRI LI-RADS: A Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound liver imaging reporting and data system for differentiation of patients at risk of hepatocellular carcinoma and liver metastasis.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Current State of Evidence for Use of MRI in LI-RADS.Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI · 2025Review
- [Research progress and clinical application in the early diagnosis and treatment technology of hepatocellular carcinoma].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 2025Review
- LI-RADS: Current Status and Future Directions.Korean journal of radiology · 2024Review
- Article
- Clinical impact of CEUS on non-characterizable observations and observations with intermediate probability of malignancy on CT/MRI in patients at risk for HCC.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2024Article
- Contrast-enhanced ultrasound liver imaging reporting and data system: clinical validation in a prospective multinational study in North America and Europe.Hepatology (Baltimore, Md.) · 2024Article
- LI-RADS: Looking Back, Looking Forward.Radiology · 2023Review
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
Background: CEUS LI-RADS and CT/MRI LI-RADS have been used in clinical practice for several years. However, there is a lack of evidence-based study to compare the proportion of hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) in each category and the distribution of HCCs of these two categorization systems. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the proportion of HCCs between corresponding CEUS LI-RADS and CT/MRI LI-RADS categories and the distribution of HCCs and non-HCC malignancies in each category. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases from January 2014 to December 2021. The proportion of HCCs and non-HCC malignancies and the corresponding sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) of the LR-5 and LR-M categories were determined using a random-effect model. Results: A total of 43 studies were included. The proportion of HCCs in CEUS LR-5 was 96%, and that in CECT/MRI LR-5 was 95% ( Conclusion: With the upshift of the LI-RADS category, the proportion of HCCs increased. CEUS LR-3 has a lower risk of HCCs than CT/MRI LR-3. CEUS LR-5 and CT/MRI LR-5 have a similar diagnostic performance for HCCs. CEUS LR-M has a higher proportion of HCCs and a lower proportion of non-HCC malignancies compared with CT/MRI LR-M.
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.