ArticleEuropean radiology2025
Characterization of hepatocellular carcinoma with CT with deep learning reconstruction compared with iterative reconstruction and 3-Tesla MRI.
Article in European radiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Artificial intelligence in imaging diagnosis of liver tumors: current status and future prospects.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study compared the characteristics of lesions suspicious for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and their LI-RADS classifications in adaptive statistical iterative reconstruction (ASIR) and deep learning reconstruction (DLR) to those of MR images, along with radiologist confidence. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis prospective single-center trial included patients who underwent four-phase liver CT and multiphasic contrast-enhanced MRI within 7 days from February to August 2023. The lesion characteristics, LI-RADS classifications and confidence scores according to two radiologists on the ASIR, DLR and MRI techniques were compared. If the patient had at least one lesion, he was included in the HCC group, otherwise in the non-HCC group. MRI being the technique with the best sensitivity, concordance of lesions characteristics and LI-RADS classifications were calculated by weighted kappa between the ASIR and MRI and between the DLR and MRI. The confidence scores are expressed as the means and standard deviations.
resultsEighty-nine patients were enrolled, 52 in the HCC group (67 years ± 9 [mean ± SD], 46 men) and 37 in the non-HCC group (68 years ± 9, 33 men). The concordance coefficient between the LI-RADS classification by ASIR and MRI was 0.64 [0.52; 0.76], showing good agreement, that by DLR and MRI was 0.83 [0.73; 0.92], showing excellent agreement. The diagnostic confidence in ASIR was 3.31 ± 0.95 (mean ± SD) and 3.0 ± 1.11, that in the DLR was 3.9 ± 0.88 and 4.11 ± 0.75, that in the MRI was 4.46 ± 0.80 and 4.57 ± 0.80.
conclusionDLR provided excellent LI-RADS classification concordance with MRI, whereas ASIR provided good concordance. The radiologists' confidence was greater in the DLR than in the ASIR but remained highest in the MR group. KEY POINTS: Question Does the use of deep learning reconstructions (DLR) improve LI-RADS classification of suspicious hepatocellular carcinoma lesions compared to adaptive statistical iterative reconstructions (ASIR)? Findings DLR demonstrated superior concordance of LI-RADS classification with MRI compared to ASIR. It also provided greater diagnostic confidence than ASIR. Clinical relevance The use of DLR enhances radiologists' ability to visualize and characterize lesions suspected of being HCC, as well as their LI-RADS classification. Moreover, it also boosts their confidence in interpreting these images.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39775897What 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.