ArticleUltrasonography (Seoul, Korea)2024
Comparison of micro-flow imaging and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography in assessing segmental congestion after right living donor liver transplantation.
Article in Ultrasonography (Seoul, Korea), 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to determine whether micro-flow imaging (MFI) offers diagnostic performance comparable to that of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography (CEUS) in detecting segmental congestion among patients undergoing living donor liver transplantation (LDLT).
methodsData from 63 patients who underwent LDLT between May and December 2022 were retrospectively analyzed. MFI and CEUS data collected on the first postoperative day were quantified. Segmental congestion was assessed based on imaging findings and laboratory data, including liver enzymes and total bilirubin levels. The reference standard was a postoperative contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan performed within 2 weeks of surgery. Additionally, a subgroup analysis examined patients who underwent reconstruction of the middle hepatic vein territory.
resultsThe sensitivity and specificity of MFI were 73.9% and 67.5%, respectively. In comparison, CEUS demonstrated a sensitivity of 78.3% and a specificity of 75.0%. These findings suggest comparable diagnostic performance, with no significant differences in sensitivity (P=0.655) or specificity (P=0.257) between the two modalities. Additionally, early postoperative laboratory values did not show significant differences between patients with and without congestion. The subgroup analysis also indicated similar diagnostic performance between MFI and CEUS.
conclusionMFI without contrast enhancement yielded results comparable to those of CEUS in detecting segmental congestion after LDLT. Therefore, MFI may be considered a viable alternative to CEUS.
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.