ArticleCureus2024
Gadoxetic Acid in MRI: A Five-Year Experience at a High-Complexity Hospital in Colombia.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective The objective of the study was to evaluate the use of the hepatospecific contrast agent, gadoxetic acid, for MRI in patients at a high-complexity hospital in Medellin, Colombia, from 2016 to 2022. Materials and methods This was an observational, descriptive, and retrospective cross-sectional study involving patients who had undergone MRI with gadoxetic acid from February 2016 to January 2022. The MRI studies were interpreted by two radiologists specializing in body imaging, each with at least 10 years of experience. The medical records of the identified patients were reviewed. Quantitative variables were presented using either means and standard deviations or medians and interquartile ranges, depending on the distribution of the variables. Qualitative variables were represented through absolute and relative frequencies. Results A total of 100 pharmacy records were collected, leading to a final sample of 75 patients aged between three and 91 years. The primary reason for imaging was to assess focal liver lesions in 58 patients (77.3%), with bile duct injury being the second most common indication in 16 patients (21.3%). A diagnostic alteration was noted in 69.3% of cases (52 patients). Among the 58 focal liver lesions analyzed using a hepatospecific agent, 31 cases (53.4%) were diagnosed as focal nodular hyperplasia. Conclusion Our study reinforces the clinical value of gadoxetic acid-enhanced MRI in refining diagnostic assessments, particularly in cases involving bile duct and focal hepatic lesions.
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.