Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37793669›Full record

ArticleKorean journal of radiology2023

Comparison Between Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography and Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging With Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography for Resectability Assessment in Extrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.

Jeongin Yoo, Jeong Min Lee, Hyo-Jin Kang, Jae Seok Bae, Sun Kyung Jeon, Jeong Hee Yoon

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Korean journal of radiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jeongin YooDepartment of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-3267-2544
Jeong Min LeeDepartment of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-0561-8777
Hyo-Jin KangDepartment of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-6771-2112
Jae Seok BaeDepartment of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-2768-7917
Sun Kyung JeonDepartment of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-8991-3986
Jeong Hee YoonDepartment of Radiology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-9925-9973
Seoul National University · KRSeoul National University Hospital · KR

Funding

National Cancer Center HA21C0143000021NRF NRF-2021R1C1C1004569
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the diagnostic performance and interobserver agreement between contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI) with magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) for evaluating the resectability in patients with extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (eCCA). MATERIALS AND

methodsThis retrospective study included treatment-naïve patients with pathologically confirmed eCCA, who underwent both CECT and CE-MRI with MRCP using extracellular contrast media between January 2015 and December 2020. Among the 214 patients (146 males; mean age ± standard deviation, 68 ± 9 years) included, 121 (56.5%) had perihilar cholangiocarcinoma. R0 resection was achieved in 108 of the 153 (70.6%) patients who underwent curative-intent surgery. Four fellowship-trained radiologists independently reviewed the findings of both CECT and CE-MRI with MRCP to assess the local tumor extent and distant metastasis for determining resectability. The pooled area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of CECT and CE-MRI with MRCP were compared using clinical, surgical, and pathological findings as reference standards. The interobserver agreement of resectability was evaluated using Fleiss kappa (κ).

resultsNo significant differences were observed between CECT and CE-MRI with MRCP in the pooled AUC (0.753 vs. 0.767), sensitivity (84.7% [366/432] vs. 90.3% [390/432]), and specificity (52.6% [223/424] vs. 51.4% [218/424]) (

conclusionCECT and CE-MRI with MRCP showed no significant differences in the diagnostic performance and interobserver agreement in determining the resectability in patients with eCCA.

Indexed as

Bile Duct NeoplasmsCholangiocarcinomaBile Ducts, IntrahepaticCholangiopancreatography, Magnetic ResonanceContrast MediaHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleRetrospective StudiesContrast MediaExtrahepatic cholangiocarcinomaKlatskin tumorMagnetic resonance cholangiopancreatographyMagnetic resonance imagingMultidetector computed tomography

Identifiers

PMID37793669
PMCPMC10550738
OpenAlexW4387005026

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.