Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39585378›Full record

ArticleAbdominal radiology (New York)2025

Evaluating the role of quantitative computed tomography perfusion parameters in differentiating hepatocellular carcinoma from other hepatic neoplasms.

Sudipta Mohakud, Vimal Sreejith, Nerbadyswari Deep Bag, Susama Patra, Manas Kumar Panigrahi, Pankaj Kumar, Brahmadatta Pattnaik, Tanmay Dutta, Suprava Naik, Taraprasad Tripathy and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

14 authors.

Sudipta MohakudAll India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India. radiol_sudipta@aiimsbhubaneswar.edu.in.
Vimal SreejithAll India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India. vimal.7sreejith@gmail.com.
Nerbadyswari Deep BagAll India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India.
Susama PatraAll India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India.
Manas Kumar PanigrahiAll India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India.
Pankaj KumarAll India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India.
Brahmadatta PattnaikAll India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India.
Tanmay DuttaAll India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India.
Suprava NaikAll India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India.
Taraprasad TripathyAll India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India.
Ranjan Kumar PatelAll India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India.
M DivyaAll India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India.
Dillip Kumar MudulyAll India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India.
Madhabananda KarAll India Institute of Medical Sciences Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDifferentiating the various liver tumors is pivotal due to distinct treatments and prognoses. Sometimes, it is difficult to accurately differentiate hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) from other hepatic neoplasms non-invasively because of overlap in the triple-phase contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) features, contraindication of an invasive biopsy, particularly in multifocal lesions with cirrhosis or ascites or when an MRI is unavailable or not feasible.

objectivesTo assess the utility of CT perfusion (CTP) parameters in differentiating HCC from other hepatic neoplasms.

methodsForty-eight patients with suspicious liver lesions underwent CTP imaging. Perfusion parameters were assessed within the tumor and the adjacent normal liver using the post-processing software. Statistical significance (p-value), sensitivity, and specificity value of the individual parameters were assessed. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was done to threshold values of the parameters.

resultsThe mean values of perfusion parameters like HAP (hepatic arterial perfusion), PVP (portal venous perfusion), HPI (hepatic perfusion index), BF (blood flow), BV (blood volume), MTT (mean transit time), and TTP (time to peak) were statistically significant (p-value < 0.05) between HCC and other hepatic neoplasms. Among the parameters, BV had the greatest AUC of 0.938. With a threshold value of 8.3 ml/100 ml/min, the sensitivity and specificity were 96.6% and 80%, respectively, in distinguishing HCC from other hepatic neoplasms. HPI, BF, BV, and TTP were statistically significant in differentiating hypervascular metastases from HCCs. HAP, HPI, BF, BV, and TTP were statistically significant in differentiating HCC from hypovascular metastases. BF and BV were significant in differentiating hypervascular from hypovascular metastases. HAP, PVP, HPI, BF, BV, and TTP were statistically significant in differentiating HCCs from intrahepatic cholangiocarcinomas.

conclusionCTP provides a quantitative, non-invasive method to differentiate HCC from other hepatic neoplasms with high efficacy. It can be a problem-solving tool when a conventional CECT scan cannot characterize a lesion as HCC, where biopsy is not feasible.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, HepatocellularLiver NeoplasmsTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdultAgedAged, 80 and overContrast MediaDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityContrast MediaAbdominal imagingCT perfusion imagingHepatic neoplasmsHepatocellular carcinomaPerfusion parameters

Identifiers

PMID39585378

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.