ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2025
Combining CEUS and CT/MRI LI-RADS major imaging features: diagnostic accuracy for classification of indeterminate liver observations in patients at risk for HCC.
Article in Abdominal radiology (New York), 2025. 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.
- Non-invasive ultrasound assessment of chronic liver disease: current position and future directions for a "one-stop" liver ultrasound approach.Insights into imaging · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Performance of PSMA PET/MRI in Characterizing LI-RADS 3 Observations in Patients with Cirrhosis.Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine · 2026Article
- Multi-algorithm radiomics machine learning models integrating ultrasound imaging and inflammation-immune features for hepatic metastases identification.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of combining CEUS and CT/MRI LI-RADS major imaging features for the improved categorization of liver observations indeterminate on both CT/MRI and CEUS. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective analysis using a database from a prospective study conducted at 11 centers in North America and Europe from 2018 to 2022 included a total of 109 participants at risk for HCC who had liver observations with indeterminate characterization (LR3, LR-4, and LR-M) on both CEUS and CT/MRI. The individual CEUS and CT/MRI LI-RADS major features were extracted from the original study and analyzed in various combinations. Reference standards included biopsy, explant histology, and follow-up CT/MRI. The diagnostic performance of the combinations of LI-RADS major features for definitive diagnosis of HCC was calculated. A reverse, stepwise logistical regression sub-analysis was also performed.
resultsThis study included 114 observations indeterminate on both CT/MRI and CEUS. These observations were categorized as LR-3 (n = 37), LR-4 (n = 41), and LR-M (n = 36) on CT/MRI and LR-3 (n = 48), LR-4 (n = 36), LR-M (n = 29), and LR-TIV (n = 1) on CEUS. Of them, 43.0% (49/114) were confirmed as HCC, 37.3% (43/114) non-malignant, and 19.3% (22/114) non-hepatocellular malignancies. The highest diagnostic accuracy among the combinations of imaging features was achieved in CT/MRI LR-3 observations, where the combination of CEUS arterial phase hyper-enhancement (APHE) + CT/MRI APHE had 96.7% specificity, 75.0% positive predictive value (PPV), and 86.5% accuracy for HCC.
conclusionThe combination of LI-RADS major features on CT/MRI and CEUS showed higher specificity, PPV, and accuracy compared to individual modalities' assessments, particularly for CT/MRI LR-3 observations.
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.