Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40065878›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Optimizing Hepatocellular Carcinoma Screening: A Comparative Simulated Abbreviated MRI Protocol Study.

Yasam Preethi, Amber S Papalkar, Sandeep Ponnaganti, Divya Pabbisetti, Ravi Theja Uppuluri, Praharaju Bala Subrahmanyam

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 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. Review
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

6 authors.

Yasam PreethiDepartment of Radiology, Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences, Secunderabad, IND.
Amber S PapalkarDepartment of Radiology, Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences, Secunderabad, IND.
Sandeep PonnagantiDepartment of Radiology, Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences, Secunderabad, IND.
Divya PabbisettiDepartment of Radiology, Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences, Secunderabad, IND.
Ravi Theja UppuluriDepartment of Radiology, Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences, Secunderabad, IND.
Praharaju Bala SubrahmanyamDepartment of Radiology, Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences, Secunderabad, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Patients with risk factors such as viral hepatitis-induced liver cirrhosis, advanced-stage primary biliary cirrhosis, hereditary hemochromatosis, metabolic-associated fatty liver disease, and alcoholic liver disease are more likely to develop hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Most HCC patients have advanced-stage disease unresponsive to treatment. Therefore, avoiding or treating viral infections and early detection through routine surveillance, such as repeated liver ultrasonography, are the most effective ways to reduce HCC-related mortality. However, as the sensitivity of ultrasound is low, many centers use contrast-enhanced CT and/or MRI for HCC surveillance. This study aimed to evaluate the per-lesion performance of simulated abbreviated non-contrast MRI (aNC-MR) compared to conventional complete MRI (cMR) for screening high-risk patients for HCC. In addition, it aimed to assess the per-lesion performance of simulated abbreviated dynamic multiphase contrast-enhanced MRI (aDCE-MRI) protocol compared to cMR for screening high-risk patients for HCC. Methodology This retrospective study conducted at a single tertiary care center included patients with liver disease at high risk for HCC over five years. These patients underwent cMR for screening. The aNC-MR protocol included diffusion-weighted imaging and T2-weighted imaging, while the aDCE-MR protocol included only the non-contrast T1 fat-saturated and dynamic post-contrast sequence. Two independent radiologists, blinded to the original cMR diagnosis, assessed two abbreviated protocol image sets, namely, an aDCE-MR set and an aNC-MR set. Each lesion was categorized as suspicious for HCC or suitable for interval screening on the aNC-MR protocol set. On the aDCE-MR image set, the lesions were designated using Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System categorization. Results Of a total of 125 lesions, 110 were evaluated and characterized using the simulated aNC-MR protocol, as 15 lesions could not be seen on aNC-MR, giving the aNC-MR protocol an overall sensitivity of 88%. On a per-lesion basis, the aNC-MR protocol compared with cMR demonstrated a negative predictive value of 96.4% and a specificity of 96.4%. Overall, 125 lesions were evaluated and characterized using the simulated aDCE-MR protocol. On a per-lesion basis, the aDCE-MR protocol compared with cMR demonstrated an negative predictive value of 100% and a specificity of 98.6%. Comparable results were observed in patients with hepatic steatosis. Conclusions The aNC-MR protocol can significantly reduce the cost and time required for MRI screening in patients at high risk for HCC. This protocol was equally effective in patients with hepatic steatosis and suboptimal ultrasound results, making it a viable and efficient screening modality.

Indexed as

abbreviated protocolcirrhosisdynamic contrast-enhanced mri (dce-mri)hbvhepatocellular carcinomahepatocellular carcinoma screeningli-radsmri liveronco-imaging

Identifiers

PMID40065878
PMCPMC11890984

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.