ArticleEuropean radiology2024
Suboptimal performance of LI-RADS v2018 on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI for detecting hepatocellular carcinoma in liver transplant candidates.
Article in European radiology, 2024. 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.
- Challenges in Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Review of Current Controversies.Cancers · 2024Review
- Inter-reader agreement for CT/MRI LI-RADS category M imaging features: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of liver cancer · 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the diagnostic performance for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) detection of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) version 2018 on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI, comparing liver transplant candidates (LT group) with patients who underwent surgical resection (SR group), and to determine significant clinical factors for diagnostic performance of LI-RADS v2018.
methodsPatients who underwent gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI and subsequent SR or LT for HCC were retrospectively included between January 2019 and December 2020. The sensitivity and specificity of LI-RADS LR-5 for HCC were compared between the two groups using generalized estimating equations. The accuracy of patient allocation according to the Milan criteria was calculated for the LT group. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to determine significant clinical factors associated with the sensitivity of LI-RADS.
resultsOf the 281 patients, 237 were assigned to the SR group, and 44 were assigned to the LT group. The LT group showed significantly lower per-patient (48.5% vs. 79.6%, p < .001) and per-lesion sensitivity (31.0% vs. 75.9%, p < .001) than the SR group, whereas no significant difference in both per-patient (100.0% vs. 91.7%, p > .99) and per-lesion specificities (100.0% vs. 94.1%, p > .99). The accuracy of patient allocation was 50.0%. Sensitivity was significantly lower in patients with a smaller lesion size (p < .001), a larger lesion number (p = .002), and a higher Child-Pugh score (p = .009).
conclusionLI-RADS v2018 on gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI might be insufficient in liver transplant candidates and other diagnostic imaging tests should be considered in patients with these significant clinical factors. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: In liver transplant candidates with a smaller lesion size, a larger lesion number, and a higher Child-Pugh score, imaging tests other than gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI may be clinically useful to determine the transplant eligibility. KEY POINTS: • The sensitivity of the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System (LI-RADS) was lower in liver transplant candidates than in those who underwent surgical resection. • With the use of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI, the accuracy of patient allocation for liver transplantation on the basis of the Milan criteria was suboptimal. • The sensitivity of LI-RADS v2018 was significantly associated with lesion size, lesion number, and Child-Pugh classification.
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.