SynthesisDiagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey)2022
Diagnostic value of magnetic resonance imaging features of microvascular invasion in hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Diagnostic and interventional radiology (Ankara, Turkey), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Accuracy of Medical Image-Based Deep Learning for Detecting Microvascular Invasion in Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Pooled it
- Intra-ablational and peri-ablational radiomics based on post-RFA gadoxetic acid disodium-enhanced MRI for predicting short-term prognosis in hepatocellular carcinoma.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Intraindividual comparison of 3-T and 5-T gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI for evaluating HCC: initial findings.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Article
- Development and validation of a digital biopsy model to predict microvascular invasion in hepatocellular carcinoma.Frontiers in oncology · 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PURPOSE This systematic review and meta-analysis of conventional enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were conducted to evaluate the diagnostic performance of imaging features of microvascular invasion (MVI) prediction in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS Relevant studies on diagnosing MVI in HCC by MRI were searched in the MEDLINE, PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and Web of Science databases. The pooled mean sensitivity and specificity were calculated using a random effects model. The corresponding positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were calculated. The summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was used to summarize the overall diagnostic accuracy. Diagnostic performance was evaluated by determining the area under the curve (AUC). Regression analysis by subgroup and sensitivity analysis were used to explore potential sources of heterogeneity. RESULTS A total of 19 studies comprising 1920 HCC patients with 2033 tumors were ultimately enrolled. For the signs of the presence of peritumoral enhancement in the arterial phase, peritumoral hypointensity in the hepatobiliary phase, irregular non-smooth margin, and rim-like enhancement in the arterial phase, the pooled sensitivity values, the pooled specificity values, the pooled PLR values, the pooled NLR values, the pooled DOR values, and the values of the AUC of SROC curves were determined. CONCLUSION The conventional MRI features for predicting MVI showed poor diagnostic performance in HCC. Only signs of the presence of peritumoral enhancement in the arterial phase showed a moderate diagnostic accuracy.
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.