ArticleGastro hep advances2022
Comparative Performance of Quantitative and Qualitative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Metrics in Primary Sclerosing Cholangitis.
Article in Gastro hep advances, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pharmacokinetic modelling of MRI-based liver function for risk assessment in primary sclerosing cholangitis: a prospective pilot study.European radiology experimental · 2026Article
- Prognostic value of magnetic resonance imaging in pediatric-onset primary sclerosing cholangitis.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2026Article
- The impact of hepatic and splenic volumetric assessment in imaging for chronic liver disease: a narrative review.Insights into imaging · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background and Aims: Several quantitative and qualitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) metrics have been reported to predict outcomes among those with primary sclerosing cholangitis (PSC). We aimed to compare the reproducibility and prognostic performances of MRI biomarkers and examine if combining these measurements adds value. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 388 patients with PSC who underwent a magnetic resonance elastography and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. Liver stiffness (LS) was determined by validated automated software, whereas spleen volume was calculated by semiautomated software, and radiologists manually determined the ANALI scores. The primary endpoint was hepatic decompensation. Results: LS and spleen volume values had perfect and near-perfect agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient of 1.00 and 0.9996, respectively), whereas ANALI with and without gadolinium had a moderate inter-rater agreement between 3 radiologists (kappa = 0.42-0.54 and 0.46-0.57, respectively). As a continuous variable, LS alone was the best predictor of hepatic decompensation (concordance score = 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.87-0.93). A quantitative-only MRI model [LS (>4.70 kPa = 2 or ≤4.70 kPa = 0) + spleen volume (>600 mm Conclusion: Quantitative MRI markers of fibrosis and portal hypertension generated by automated and semiautomated software are highly reproducible. LS is the single best imaging predictor of hepatic decompensation. However, a quantitative MRI score using LS and spleen volume is well suited to risk stratify those with PSC.
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.