Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36528729›Full record

ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2023

Differentiation of focal nodular hyperplasia and hepatocellular adenoma using qualitative and quantitative imaging features and classification and regression tree analysis.

Talal M Alamri, Milena Cerny, Mohammad Al Shaikh, Jean-Sébastien Billiard, Damien Olivié, Miguel Chagnon, An Tang

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Potential to Avoid Invasive Procedures for Atypical Focal Nodular Hyperplasia (FNH) and FNH-like Lesions Based on MR Findings.Magnetic resonance in medical sciences : MRMS : an official journal of Japan Society of Magnetic Resonance in Medicine · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

7 authors.

Talal M AlamriDepartment of Radiology, Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, H2X 0C1, Canada.
Milena CernyDepartment of Radiology, Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, H2X 0C1, Canada.
Mohammad Al ShaikhDepartment of Radiology, Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, H2X 0C1, Canada.
Jean-Sébastien BilliardDepartment of Radiology, Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, H2X 0C1, Canada.
Damien OliviéDepartment of Radiology, Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, H2X 0C1, Canada.
Miguel ChagnonDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.
An TangDepartment of Radiology, Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), 1000 rue Saint-Denis, Montréal, QC, H2X 0C1, Canada. an.tang@umontreal.ca.ORCID 0000-0001-8967-5503

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo assess qualitative and quantitative analysis of gadoxetate disodium-enhanced hepatobiliary phase MR imaging (MRI) and assess the performance of classification and regression tree analysis for the differentiation of focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH) and hepatocellular adenoma (HCA). MATERIALS AND

methodsThis retrospective study was approved by our local ethics committee. One hundred seventy patients suspected of having FNH or HCA underwent gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI. The reference standard was either pathology or follow-up imaging. Two readers reviewed images to identify qualitative imaging features and measure signal intensity on unenhanced, dynamic, and hepatobiliary phase images. For quantitative analysis, contrast enhancement ratio (CER), lesion-to-liver contrast (LLC), signal intensity ratio (SIR), and relative signal enhancement ratio (RSER) were calculated. A classification and regression tree (CART) analysis was developed.

resultsEighty-five patients met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 97 FNHs and 43 HCAs. For qualitative analysis, the T1 signal intensity on the hepatobiliary phase provided the highest overall classification performance (91.9% sensitivity, 90.1% specificity, and 90.9% accuracy). For quantitative analysis, RSER in the hepatobiliary phase with a threshold of 0.723 provided the highest classification performance (92.6% sensitivity and 89.4% specificity) to differentiate FNHs from HCAs. A CART model based on five qualitative imaging features provided an accuracy of 94.4% (95% confidence interval 90.0-98.9%).

conclusionGadoxetate disodium-enhanced hepatobiliary phase provides high diagnostic performance as demonstrated in quantitative and qualitative analysis in differentiation of FNH and HCA, supported by a CART decision model.

Indexed as

Adenoma, Liver CellCarcinoma, HepatocellularFocal Nodular HyperplasiaLiver NeoplasmsAminesContrast MediaDiagnosis, DifferentialGadolinium DTPAHumansImage EnhancementMagnetic Resonance ImagingRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityAminesContrast MediaGadolinium DTPAgadolinium ethoxybenzyl DTPAClassification and regression tree analysis (CART)Focal nodular hyperplasia (FNH)Gadoxetate disodium-enhanced hepatobiliary phaseGadoxetic acidHepatocellular adenoma (HCA)Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)

Identifiers

PMID36528729

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.